Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Doyle, Charles" in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Federal Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: The 18 U.S.C. 924(c) Tack-On in Cases Involving Drugs or Violence [October 21, 2013]
"Section 924(c) requires the imposition of one of a series of mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment upon conviction for misconduct involving the firearm and the commission of a federal crime of violence or a federal drug trafficking offense. The terms vary according to the type of firearm used, the manner of the firearm's involvement, and whether the conviction involves a single, first-time offense. Liability extends to co-conspirators and to those who aid or abet in the commission of a violation of the section. If a machine gun, silencer, short barreled rifle, short barreled shotgun, or body armor is involved, the offense is punished more severely. If the firearm is brandished or discharged, the offense is punished more severely. Repeat offenders are likewise punished more severely. Twenty-five-year mandatory minimum terms for multiple offenses must be served consecutively. […] The United States Sentencing Commission has suggested that Congress consider amending Section 924(c) to (1) address the 'stacking' of 25-year charges for multiple offenses; (2) require a prior conviction to trigger repeat offender enhancements; (3) provide sentencing courts with discretion over whether to impose concurrent or consecutive sentences; and (4) clarify the statutory definitions of the terms used in Section 924(c). Section 924(c) has withstood constitutional challenges based on the Second Amendment's right to bear arms; the Eighth Amendment's cruel and unusual punishments prohibition; the Sixth Amendment's right to jury trial; the Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy proscription; and the Constitution's structural limitations on preservation of the separation of powers and on Congress's authority under the Commerce Clause."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-10-21
-
Federal Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Statutes [September 9, 2013]
"Federal mandatory minimum sentencing statutes (mandatory minimums) demand that execution or incarceration follow criminal conviction. Among other things, they cover drug dealing, murdering federal officials, and using a gun to commit a federal crime. They have been a feature of federal sentencing since the dawn of the republic. They circumscribe judicial sentencing discretion, although they impose few limitations upon prosecutorial discretion, or upon the President's power to pardon. They have been criticized as unthinkingly harsh and incompatible with a rational sentencing guideline system; yet they have also been embraced as hallmarks of truth in sentencing and a certain means of incapacitating the criminally dangerous. This is a brief overview of federal statutes in the area and a discussion of some of the constitutional challenges they have faced."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-09-09
-
Venue: A Brief Look at Federal Law Governing Where a Federal Crime May Be Tried [January 24, 2014]
"The United States Constitution assures those charged with a serious federal crime that they are entitled to jury trial in the state and district in which the crime occurred. A crime occurs in any district in which any of its 'conduct' elements are committed. Some offenses are committed entirely within a single district; there they must be tried. Other crimes have elements that have occurred in more than one district. Still other crimes have been committed overseas and so have occurred outside any district. Statutory provisions dictate where a multi-district crime or overseas crime may be tried. Section 3237 of Title 18 of the 'U.S. Code' supplies three general rules for venue in multi-district cases. Tax cases may be tried where the taxpayer resides. Mail and interstate commerce offenses may be tried in any district traversed during the course of a particular crime. Continuous or overlapping offenses may be tried in any district in which they begin, continue, or are completed. For example, conspiracy, perhaps the most common continuous offense, may be tried where the scheme is joined or where any overt act in its furtherance is committed. These general rules aside, a few crimes, like murder or immigration offenses, have individual venue provisions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2014-01-24
-
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Legislation in the 113th Congress [February 7, 2014]
"Defendants convicted of violating certain federal criminal laws face the prospect of mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment. Bills offered during the 113th Congress would supplement, enhance, or eliminate some of these. In the most all-encompassing, H.R. 1695 (Representative Scott (VA)) and S. 619 (Senator Paul) would permit federal courts to impose a sentence below an otherwise applicable mandatory minimum when necessary to avoid violating certain statutory directives. Federal drug statutes feature a series of mandatory minimums. S. 1410 (Senator Durbin)/H.R. 3382 (Representative Labrador) and S. 1410 (Judiciary), as voted by the Judiciary Committee, would reduce several of the most severe of these. H.R. 3088 (Representative Waters) would eliminate virtually all of them. The Durbin bill would also enlarge the safety valve exception. The safety valve provision allows a federal court to sentence qualified defendants below the statutory mandatory minimum in drug cases, if the defendant has a virtually spotless criminal record, that is, not more than one criminal history point. S. 1410 would expand safety valve eligibility to defendants with a slightly more extensive criminal record. Elsewhere, H.R. 2372 (Representative Scott (VA)) would drop the sentencing distinction between powder and crack cocaine by striking the cocaine base specific references. Two proposals address the Fair Sentencing Act's retroactive application. One, H.R. 2369 (Representative Scott (VA)) would permit a court to reduce, consistent with the act, a previously imposed sentence for crack cocaine possession or trafficking. The second, S. 1410 (Senator Durbin), would also permit a court to reduce such sentences, but would limit the authority to instances in which the defendant had not been previously granted or denied a similar reduction."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2014-02-07
-
Perjury Under Federal Law: A Brief Overview [January 28, 2014]
"There are three general federal perjury laws. One, 18 U.S.C. 1621, outlaws presenting material false statements under oath in federal official proceedings. A second, 18 U.S.C. 1623, bars presenting material false statements under oath before or ancillary to federal court or grand jury proceedings. A third, 18 U.S.C. 1622 (subornation of perjury), prohibits inducing or procuring another to commit perjury in violation of either Section 1621 or Section 1623. In most cases, the courts abbreviate their description of the elements and state that to prove perjury in a judicial context under Section 1623 the government must establish that the defendant '(1) knowingly made a (2) false (3) material declaration (4) under oath (5) in a proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States.' […] This report is available in abbreviated form--without footnotes, quotations, or citations--as CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report 98-807, 'Perjury Under Federal Law: A Sketch of the Elements.' Both versions have been largely excerpted from CRS Report RL34303, 'Obstruction of Justice: An Overview of Some of the Federal Statutes That Prohibit Interference with Judicial, Executive, or Legislative Activities.' […] All are by Charles Doyle."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2014-01-28
-
Corporate Criminal Liability: An Overview of Federal Law [October 30, 2013]
"A corporation is criminally liable for the federal crimes its employees or agents commit in its interest. Corporate officers, employees, and agents are individually liable for the crimes they commit, for the crimes they conspire to commit, for the foreseeable crimes their coconspirators commit, for the crimes whose commission they aid and abet, and for the crimes whose perpetrators they assist after the fact. The decision whether to prosecute a corporation rests with the Justice Department. Internal guidelines identify the factors that are to be weighed. [...] As in the case of individual defendants, corporation prosecutions rarely result in a criminal trial. More often, the corporation pleads guilty or enters into a deferred or delayed prosecution agreement. During a criminal investigation and throughout the course of criminal proceedings, corporations enjoy many, but not all, of the constitutional rights implicated in the criminal investigation or prosecution of an individual. Corporations have no Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. On the other hand, the courts have recognized or have assumed that corporations have a First Amendment right to free speech; a Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures; a Fifth Amendment right to due process and protection against double jeopardy; Sixth Amendment rights to counsel, jury trial, speedy trial, and to confront accusers, and to subpoena witnesses; and Eighth Amendment protection against excessive fines. Corporations cannot be jailed. Otherwise, corporations and individuals face many of the same consequences following conviction. The federal Sentencing Guidelines influence the sentencing consequences of conviction in many instances. Corporations can be fined. They can be placed on probation. They can be ordered to pay restitution. Their property can be confiscated. They can be barred from engaging in various types of commercial activity. The Guidelines speak to all of these."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-10-30
-
Corporate Criminal Liability: An Abbreviated Overview of Federal Law [October 30, 2013]
"A corporation is criminally liable for the federal crimes its employees or agents commit in its interest. Corporate officers, employees, and agents are individually liable for the crimes they commit, for the crimes they conspire to commit, for the foreseeable crimes their coconspirators commit, for the crimes whose commission they aid and abet, and for the crimes whose perpetrators they assist after the fact. The decision whether to prosecute a corporation rests with the Justice Department. Internal guidelines identify the factors that are to be weighed: the strength of the case against the corporation; the extent and history of misconduct; the existence of a compliance program; the corporation's cooperation with the investigation; the collateral consequences; whether the corporation has made restitution or taken other remedial measures; and the alternatives to federal prosecution. As in the case of individual defendants, corporation prosecutions rarely result in a criminal trial. More often, the corporation pleads guilty or enters into a deferred or delayed prosecution agreement. During a criminal investigation and throughout the course of criminal proceedings, corporations enjoy many, but not all, of the constitutional rights implicated in the criminal investigation or prosecution of an individual. Corporations have no Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. On the other hand, the courts have recognized or have assumed that corporations have a First Amendment right to free speech; a Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures; a Fifth Amendment right to due process and protection against double jeopardy; Sixth Amendment rights to counsel, jury trial, speedy trial, and to confront accusers, and to subpoena witnesses; and Eighth Amendment protection against excessive fines."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-10-30
-
Perjury Under Federal Law: A Sketch of the Elements [January 28, 2014]
"There are three general federal perjury laws. One, 18 U.S.C. 1621, outlaws presenting material false statements under oath in federal official proceedings. A second, 18 U.S.C. 1623, bars presenting material false statements under oath before or ancillary to federal court or grand jury proceedings. A third, 18 U.S.C. 1622 (subornation of perjury), prohibits inducing or procuring another to commit perjury in violation of either Section 1621 or Section 1623. In most cases, the courts abbreviate their description of the elements and state that to prove perjury in a judicial context under Section 1623 the government must establish that the defendant '(1) knowingly made a (2) false (3) material declaration (4) under oath (5) in a proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States.' […] This report is an abbreviated version of CRS Report 98-808, 'Perjury Under Federal Law: A Brief Overview,' by Charles Doyle, stripped of most footnotes, quotations, citations, and bibliography."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2014-01-28
-
Sex Trafficking: An Overview of Federal Criminal Law [June 25, 2015]
"Sex trafficking is a state crime. Federal law, however, makes it a federal crime to conduct the activities of a sex trafficking enterprise in a way that affects interstate or foreign commerce or that involves travel in interstate or foreign commerce. Section 1591 of Title 18 of the 'United States Code' outlaws sex trafficking activities that affect interstate or foreign commerce. The Mann Act outlaws sex trafficking activities that involve travel in interstate or foreign commerce. The Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015 (Victims Justice Act; P.L. 114-22/S. 178) amended both §1591 and the Mann Act. Section 1591 now provides in part the following: 'Whoever knowingly in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, recruits, entices, harbors, transports, provides, obtains, advertises, maintains, patronizes, or solicits by any means a person; knowing, or in reckless disregard of the fact, that means of force, threats of force, fraud, coercion ... , or any combination of such means will be used to cause the person to engage in a commercial sex act, or that the person has not attained the age of 18 years and will be caused to engage in a commercial sex act,' shall be imprisoned not less than 15 years (not less than 10 years, if the victim is 14 years of age or older and the offender is less than 18 years of age)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-06-25
-
Federal Grand Juries: The Law in a Nutshell [May 7, 2015]
"The federal grand jury exists to investigate crimes against the United States and to secure the constitutional right of grand jury indictment. Its responsibilities require broad powers. As an arm of the U.S. District Court which summons it, upon whose process it relies, and which will receive any indictments it returns, the grand jury's subject matter and geographical jurisdiction is that of the court to which it is attached. Ordinarily, the law is entitled to everyone's evidence. Witnesses subpoenaed to appear before the grand jury, therefore, will find little to excuse their appearance. Once before the panel, however, they are entitled to the benefit of various constitutional, common law and statutory privileges, including the right to withhold self-incriminating testimony and the security of confidentiality of their attorney-client communications. They are not, however, entitled to have an attorney with them in the grand jury room when they testify. Unless the independence of the grand jury is overborne, irregularities in the grand jury process ordinarily will not result in dismissal of an indictment, particularly where dismissal is sought after conviction. The grand jury conducts its business in secret, although witnesses are not bound and the rules permit disclosure of matters occurring before the grand jury under limited circumstances with court approval. Citations for the quotations and statements in this report may be found in CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report 95-1135, 'The Federal Grand Jury,' from which this report has been abridged."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-05-07
-
Sentence Reform Acts: S.2123 and H.R. 3713 [October 14, 2015]
"As introduced, the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015, S. 2123, and the Sentencing Reform Act of 2015, H.R. 3713, use virtually identical language to reduce the impact of the mandatory minimum sentences which federal courts must now impose for certain drug trafficking and firearms offenses. [The following are the] [k]ey [t]akeaways: [1] Existing law requires long minimum sentences for certain drug traffickers who have prior drug convictions. S. 2123 and H.R. 3713 would shorten the mandatory minimums, but apply them for both prior drug and violent felony convictions. [2] The safety valve permits judges to ignore mandatory minimums for certain lowlevel, nonviolent drug traffickers with virtually no criminal record. The bills would make the safety valve available to traffickers with slightly more serious criminal records. [3] The bills would establish a mini-safety valve which would permit judges to treat the 10-year drug trafficking mandatory minimums as if they were 5-year mandatory minimums for the benefit of nonviolent defendants with no prior serious drug or violent crime convictions. [4] The proposals would permit retroactive application of the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act crack/powder cocaine amendments under some circumstances. [5] S. 2123 and H.R. 3713 would reduce the Armed Career Criminal mandatory minimum to 10 years from 15 years. [6] The bills would increase to 15 years the maximum penalties for possession of a firearm by a felon and various other firearms offenses. [7] H.R. 3713, but not S. 2123, would add a consecutive term of imprisonment for not more than five years to the mandatory minimums in drug trafficking cases which involve heroin or fentanyl (a heroin cutter and counterfeit). [8] S. 2123, but not H.R. 3713, would establish new mandatory minimums for certain interstate domestic violence offenses and International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) violations. [9] S. 2123, but not H.R. 3713, would direct the Attorney General to prepare an inventory of federal statutory crimes and various federal agencies to prepare a comparable inventory of federal regulatory offenses."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-10-14
-
Sentencing Reform: Comparison of Selected Proposals [October 26, 2015]
"This is a comparison of selected criminal sentencing reform bills as introduced: H.R. 3713, H.R. 2944, S. 502, and H.R. 920; and S. 2123 as passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee with a manager's amendment. It consists of narrative and charts comparing the bills with respect to adjustments in the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions that apply to controlled substance and firearms offenses, the safety valve, and retroactive application of the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cole, Jared P.; Doyle, Charles
2015-10-26
-
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: Federal Aggravated Identity Theft [August 20, 2015]
"Aggravated identity theft is punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment for two years or by imprisonment for five years if it relates to a terrorism offense. At least thus far, the government has rarely prosecuted the five-year terrorism form of the offense. The two-year offense occurs when an individual knowingly possesses, uses, or transfers the means of identification of another person, without lawful authority to do so, during and in relation to one of more than 60 predicate federal felony offenses […]. Section 1028A has the effect of establishing a mandatory minimum sentence for those predicate felony offenses, when they involve identity theft. A sentencing court has the discretion not to 'stack' or pancake multiple aggravated identity theft counts and, as with other mandatory minimums, may impose a sentence of less than the mandatory minimum at the request of the prosecution based on the defendant's substantial assistance. More than half of the judges responding to a United States Sentence Commission survey felt the two-year mandatory minimum penalty was generally appropriate. The Commission's report on mandatory minimum sentencing statutes is mildly complimentary of the provision."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-08-20
-
Federal Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: The 18 U.S.C. 924(c) Tack-On in Cases Involving Drugs or Violence [September 16, 2015]
"Section 924(c) requires the imposition of one of a series of mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment upon conviction for misconduct involving the firearm and the commission of a federal crime of violence or a federal drug trafficking offense. The terms vary according to the type of firearm used, the manner of the firearm's involvement, and whether the conviction involves a single, first-time offense. Liability extends to co-conspirators and to those who aid or abet in the commission of a violation of the section. If a machine gun, silencer, short barreled rifle, short barreled shotgun, or body armor is involved, the offense is punished more severely. If the firearm is brandished or discharged, the offense is punished more severely. Repeat offenders are likewise punished more severely. Twenty-five-year mandatory minimum terms for multiple offenses must be served consecutively. The mandatory minimum terms range from imprisonment for five years to imprisonment for life; consecutive mandatory minimum terms may exceed 100 years. In each case the maximum term is life imprisonment."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-09-16
-
No True Bill: A Grand Jury's Refusal to Indict [November 26, 2014]
This report provides a brief overview of the legal aspects of grand jury indictments in federal felony cases. As stated in the report: "Grand jury indictment is a constitutional right in federal felony cases. It is an alternative means of prosecution in many states. In either system, the grand jury is the people's panel. It stands as a group of randomly-selected members of the community, strategically placed "as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people." It serves the "twin historical responsibilities [of] bringing to trial those who may be justly accused and shielding the innocent from unfounded accusation and prosecution." If the grand jury agrees that the evidence before it warrants indictment, it may indict and the accused may be brought to trial. If the grand jury does not agree and refuses to indict, an accused may not be brought to trial under indictment. Yet, the prosecutor's role before the grand jury can have a significant impact."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2014-11-26
-
Crime and Forfeiture: In Short [January 22, 2015]
From the summary: "Forfeiture has long been an effective law enforcement tool. Congress and state legislatures have authorized its use for over 200 years. […] Modern forfeiture follows one of two procedural routes. Although crime triggers all forfeitures, they are classified as civil forfeitures or criminal forfeitures according to the nature of the procedure that ends in confiscation. Civil forfeiture is an in rem proceeding. The property is the defendant in the case. Unless the statute provides otherwise, the innocence of the owner is irrelevant--it is enough that the property was involved in a violation to which forfeiture attaches. As a matter of expedience and judicial economy, Congress often allows administrative forfeiture in uncontested civil confiscation cases. Criminal forfeiture is an in personam proceeding, and confiscation is only possible upon the conviction of the owner of the property. […] The statutes governing the disposal of forfeited property may authorize its destruction, its transfer for governmental purposes, or deposit of the property or of the proceeds from its sale in a special fund. Intergovernmental transfers and the use of special funds are hallmarks of federal forfeiture. Every year federal agencies transfer hundreds of millions of dollars and property to state, local, and foreign law enforcement officials as compensation for their contribution to joint enforcement efforts."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-01-22
-
Armed Career Criminal Act (18 U.S.C. 924(e)): An Overview [July 29, 2015]
"The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. 924(e), requires imposition of a minimum 15-year term of imprisonment for recidivists convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. 922(g), who have three prior state or federal convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses. Section 924(e) defines serious drug offenses as those punishable by imprisonment for 10 years or more. It defines violent felonies as those (1) that have an element of threat, attempt, or use of physical force against another, (2) that involve burglary, arson, or extortion, or (3) that constitute crime similar to burglary, arson, or extortion under the section's 'residual clause.' The Sentencing Commission recommended that Congress consider clarifying the statutory definitions of the violent felony categories. Thereafter in 'Johnson v. United States', the Supreme Court declared the residual clause unconstitutionally vague and thus effectively void. Otherwise, constitutional challenges to the application of §924(e) have been largely unsuccessful, regardless of whether they were based on arguments of cruel and unusual punishment, double jeopardy, due process, grand jury indictment or jury trial rights, the right to bear arms, or limits on Congress's legislative authority."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-07-29
-
Crime Victims' Rights Act: A Summary and Legal Analysis of 18 U.S.C. §3771 [December 9, 2015]
"Section 3771 of Title 18 of the 'United States Code' is a statutory bill of rights for victims of crimes committed in violation of federal law or the laws of the District of Columbia. It defines victims as anyone directly and proximately harmed by such an offense, individuals and legal entities alike. It does not appear to include family relatives of a deceased, child, or incapacitated victim except in a representative capacity. Numbered among the rights it conveys are (1) the right to be reasonably protected from the accused; (2) the right to notification of public court and parole proceedings and of any release of the accused; (3) the right not to be excluded from public court proceedings under most circumstances; (4) the right to be heard in public court proceedings relating to bail, the acceptance of a plea bargain, sentencing, or parole; (5) the right to confer with the prosecutor; (6) the right to restitution under the law; (7) the right to proceedings free from unwarranted delays; (8) the right to be treated fairly and with respect to one's dignity and privacy; (9) the right to be informed in a timely manner of any plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement; and (10) the right to be informed of the statutory rights and services to which one is entitled. The section directs the courts and law enforcement officials to see to it that the rights it creates are honored. Both victims and prosecutors may assert the rights and seek review from the appellate courts should the rights be initially denied. The section vests no rights in the accused nor does it create cause of action damages in any instance where a victim is afforded less than the section's full benefits."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-12-09
-
Crime Victims' Rights Act: A Sketch of 18 U.S.C. 3771 [December 9, 2015]
"Section 3771 of Title 18 of the 'United States Code' is a statutory bill of rights for victims of crimes committed in violation of federal law or the laws of the District of Columbia. It defines victims as anyone directly and proximately harmed by such an offense, individuals and legal entities alike. It does not appear to include family relatives of a deceased, child, or incapacitated victim, except in a representative capacity. Numbered among the rights it conveys are (1) the right to be reasonably protected from the accused; (2) the right to notification of public court and parole proceedings and of any release of the accused; (3) the right not to be excluded from public court proceedings under most circumstances; (4) the right to be heard in public court proceedings relating to bail, the acceptance of a plea bargain, sentencing, or parole; (5) the right to confer with the prosecutor; (6) the right to restitution under the law; (7) the right to proceedings free from unwarranted delays; (8) the right to be treated fairly and with respect to one's dignity and privacy; (9) the right to be informed in a timely manner of any plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement; and (10) the right to be informed of the statutory rights and services to which one is entitled."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2015-12-09
-
Federal Conspiracy Law: A Brief Overview [January 20, 2016]
From the Summary: "Zacarias Moussaoui, members of the Colombian drug cartels, members of organized crime, and some of the former Enron executives have at least one thing in common: they all have federal conspiracy convictions. The essence of conspiracy is an agreement of two or more persons to engage in some form of prohibited conduct. The crime is complete upon agreement, although some statutes require prosecutors to show that at least one of the conspirators has taken some concrete step or committed some overt act in furtherance of the scheme. There are dozens of federal conspiracy statutes. One, 18 U.S.C. 371, outlaws conspiracy to commit some other federal crime. The others outlaw conspiracy to engage in various specific forms of proscribed conduct. General Section 371 conspiracies are punishable by imprisonment for not more than five years; drug trafficking, terrorist, and racketeering conspiracies all carry the same penalties as their underlying substantive offenses, and thus are punished more severely than are Section 371 conspiracies. All are subject to fines of not more than $250,000 (not more than $500,000 for organizations); most may serve as the basis for a restitution order, and some for a forfeiture order."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2016-01-20
-
Federal Conspiracy Law: A Sketch [January 20, 2016]
From the Summary: "Zacarias Moussaoui, members of the Colombian drug cartels, members of organized crime, and some of the former Enron executives have at least one thing in common: they all have federal conspiracy convictions. The essence of conspiracy is an agreement of two or more persons to engage in some form of prohibited conduct. The crime is complete upon agreement, although some statutes require prosecutors to show that at least one of the conspirators has taken some concrete step or committed some overt act in furtherance of the scheme. There are dozens of federal conspiracy statutes. One, 18 U.S.C. 371, outlaws conspiracy to commit some other federal crime. The others outlaw conspiracy to engage in various specific forms of proscribed conduct. General Section 371 conspiracies are punishable by imprisonment for not more than five years; drug trafficking, terrorist, and racketeering conspiracies all carry the same penalties as their underlying substantive offenses, and thus are punished more severely than are Section 371 conspiracies. All are subject to fines of not more than $250,000 (not more than $500,000 for organizations); most may serve as the basis for a restitution order, and some for a forfeiture order."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2016-01-20
-
United States Supreme Court: Criminal Law Cases in the October 2015 Term [April 6, 2016]
This report highlights criminal law cases that went in front of the United States Supreme Court during the October 2015 Term. They cover white collar crime, sex offenses, firearms, the Fourth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment, sentencing, and prisoners.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Herman, Sarah S.; Doyle, Charles
2016-04-06
-
RICO: A Brief Sketch [May 18, 2016]
This report provides a brief sketch of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and examines each element that makes up the RICO. The report begins with the following introduction: "Congress enacted the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) provisions as part of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. In spite of its name and origin, RICO is not limited to "mobsters" or members of "organized crime" as those terms are popularly understood. Rather, it covers those activities which Congress felt characterized the conduct of organized crime, no matter who actually engages in them. RICO proscribes no conduct that is not otherwise prohibited. Instead it enlarges the civil and criminal consequences, under some circumstances, of a list of state and federal crimes. In simple terms, RICO condemns (1) any person (2) who (a) invests in, or (b) acquires or maintains an interest in, or (c) conducts or participates in the affairs of, or (d) conspires to invest in, acquire, or conduct the affairs of (3) an enterprise (4) which (a) engages in, or (b) whose activities affect, interstate or foreign commerce (5) through (a) the collection of an unlawful debt, or (b) the patterned commission of various state and federal crimes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2016-05-18
-
Sentencing Reform Act of 2015 (H.R. 3713): A Summary [May 16, 2016]
"H.R. 3713, the Sentencing Reform Act of 2015, addresses the sentences that may be imposed in various drug and firearms cases. It proposes amendments to those areas of federal law that govern mandatory minimum sentencing requirements for drug and firearm offenses; the so-called safety valves which permits court to impose sentences below otherwise required mandatory minimums in the case of certain low-level drug offenders; and the retroactive application of the Fair Sentencing Act."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2016-05-16
-
Stealing Trade Secrets and Economic Espionage: An Overview of the Economic Espionage Act [August 19, 2016]
"Stealing a trade secret is a federal crime when the information relates to a product in interstate or foreign commerce, 18 U.S.C. 1832 (theft of trade secrets), or when the intended beneficiary is a foreign power, 18 U.S.C. 1831 (economic espionage). Section 1832 requires that the thief be aware that the misappropriation will injure the secret's owner to the benefit of someone else. Section 1831 requires only that the thief intend to benefit a foreign government or one of its instrumentalities. […] Depending on the circumstances, misconduct captured in the two sections may be prosecuted under other federal statutes as well. A defendant charged with stealing trade secrets is often indictable under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the National Stolen Property Act, and/or the federal wire fraud statute. One indicted on economic espionage charges may often be charged with acting as an unregistered foreign agent and on occasion with disclosing classified information or under the general espionage statutes. Finally, by virtue of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (P.L. 114-153), Section 1831 and 1832 are predicate offenses for purposes of the federal racketeering and money laundering statutes. P.L. 114-153 (S. 1890) dramatically increased EEA civil enforcement options when it authorized private causes of action for the victims of trade secret misappropriation. In addition, the EEA now permits pre-trial seizure orders in some circumstances, counterbalanced with sanctions for erroneous seizures."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2016-08-19
-
United States Supreme Court: Criminal Law Cases in the October 2015 Term [September 27, 2016]
This CRS report details criminal law cases in the Supreme Court in the October 2015 term. The criminal cases related to the following topics: white collar crime - Hobbs Act and computer fraud; sex offenses; firearms and Armed Career Criminal Act; Fourth Amendment; Fifth Amendment; Sixth Amendment; sentencing and capital punishment; and prisoners.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Herman, Sarah S.; Doyle, Charles
2016-09-27
-
Abridged Sketch of Extradition To and From the United States
"'Extradition' is the formal surrender of a person by a State to another State for prosecution or punishment. Extradition to or from the United States is a creature of treaty. The United States has extradition treaties with over a hundred nations, although there are many countries with which it has no extradition treaty. International terrorism and drug trafficking have made extradition an increasingly important law enforcement tool. [...] This is an abbreviated version of CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report 98-958, Extradition To and From the United States: Overview of the Law and Recent Treaties, by Michael John Garcia and Charles Doyle, without the appendices, footnotes, and citations to authority found in the longer report."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2016-10-04
-
Extraterritorial Application of American Criminal Law [October 31, 2016]
From the Document: "Criminal law is usually territorial. It is a matter of the law of the place where it occurs. Nevertheless, a number of American criminal laws apply extraterritorially outside of the United States. Application is generally a question of legislative intent, express or implied. [...] Although the crimes over which the United States has extraterritorial jurisdiction may be many, so are the obstacles to their enforcement. For both practical and diplomatic reasons, criminal investigations within another country require the acquiescence, consent, or preferably the assistance, of the authorities of the host country. The United States has mutual legal assistance treaties with several countries designed to formalize such cooperative law enforcement assistance. It has agreements for the same purpose in many other instances. Cooperation, however, may introduce new obstacles. Searches and interrogations carried out jointly with foreign officials, certainly if they involve Americans, must be conducted within the confines of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. And the Sixth Amendment imposes limits upon the use in American criminal trials of depositions taken abroad. [...] This report is available in an abridged version, stripped of its attachments, bibliography, footnotes, and most of its citations to authority, as CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RS22497, Extraterritorial Application of American Criminal Law: An Abbreviated Sketch, by Charles Doyle."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2016-10-31
-
Search and Seizure Cases in the October 2012 Term of the Supreme Court [May 15, 2013]
"This term, the Supreme Court considers whether (1) deploying a drug-detecting dog at the front door of a house qualifies as a Fourth Amendment search ('Florida v. Jardines'); (2) the positive reaction of a trained, drug-detecting dog constitutes probable cause per se (Florida v. Harris); and (3) the rationale which permits the warrantless, suspicionless detention of individuals found in a place covered by a search warrant also permits the warrantless, suspicionless off-site apprehension and return of individuals who have recently left a place covered by a search warrant ('Bailey v. United States'). The Supreme Court has said in the past that walking a drug-detecting dog around a car pulled over on the highway or around luggage in an airport is not a Fourth Amendment search. Nevertheless, the Court in 'Jardines' noted that those cases were decided under the 'expectation of privacy' rationale. Under the alternative 'property intrusion' rationale, a Fourth Amendment search occurred when police used a trained dog to test for the smell of marijuana on Jardines's porch."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-05-15
-
Libraries and the USA PATRIOT Act [Updated August 19, 2005]
"The USA PATRIOT Act, P.L. 107-56, enacted to help track down and punish terrorists and to prevent further terrorism, contains no provisions specifically directed at libraries or their patrons. It has several provisions, however, that might apply in a library context. The most frequently mentioned of these is Section 215 that amends the business record sections of the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act (FISA). Section 215 is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005. The House and the Senate have approved bills that would postpone expiration and modify the provisions of Section 215, H.R. 3199 and S. 1389. Before the USA PATRIOT Act, federal authorities, engaged in gathering foreign intelligence information or conducting an investigation of international terrorism, could seek a FISA court order for access to hotel, airline, storage locker, or car rental business records. The businesses to whom the orders were addressed were bound to silence. Section 215 amended the procedure so that in a foreign intelligence or international terrorism investigation federal authorities may obtain a FISA order for access to any tangible item no matter who holds it, including by implication library loan records and the records of library computer use. Although past practices have apparently made the library community apprehensive, the extent to which the authority of Section 215 has been used, if at all, is unclear. Media accounts of federal investigations involving library patrons ordinarily do not distinguish between simple inquiries, grand jury subpoenas, criminal search warrants, FISA physical search orders, and FISA tangible item orders."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2005-08-19
