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).
-
Privacy: An Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act [October 9, 2012]
"This report provides an overview of federal law governing wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). It also appends citations to state law in the area and the text of ECPA. It is a federal crime to wiretap or to use a machine to capture the communications of others without court approval, unless one of the parties has given his prior consent. It is likewise a federal crime to use or disclose any information acquired by illegal wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping. Violations can result in imprisonment for not more than five years; fines up to $250,000 (up to $500,000 for organizations); civil liability for damages, attorneys' fees and possibly punitive damages; disciplinary action against any attorneys involved; and suppression of any derivative evidence. Congress has created separate, but comparable, protective schemes for electronic communications (e.g., email) and against the surreptitious use of telephone call monitoring practices such as pen registers and trap and trace devices. Each of these protective schemes comes with a procedural mechanism to afford limited law enforcement access to private communications and communications records under conditions consistent with the dictates of the Fourth Amendment. The government has been given narrowly confined authority to engage in electronic surveillance, conduct physical searches, and install and use pen registers and trap and trace devices for law enforcement purposes under ECPA and for purposes of foreign intelligence gathering under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-10-09
-
Privacy: An Abridged Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act [October 9, 2012]
"This report provides an overview of federal law governing wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). It is a federal crime to wiretap or to use a machine to capture the communications of others without court approval, unless one of the parties has given his prior consent. It is likewise a federal crime to use or disclose any information acquired by illegal wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping. Violations can result in imprisonment for not more than five years; fines up to $250,000 (up to $500,000 for organizations); civil liability for damages, attorneys' fees and possibly punitive damages; disciplinary action against any attorneys involved; and suppression of any derivative evidence. Congress has created separate, but comparable, protective schemes for electronic communications (e.g., email) and against the surreptitious use of telephone call monitoring practices such as pen registers and trap and trace devices. Each of these protective schemes comes with a procedural mechanism to afford limited law enforcement access to private communications and communications records under conditions consistent with the dictates of the Fourth Amendment. The government has been given narrowly confined authority to engage in electronic surveillance, conduct physical searches, and install and use pen registers and trap and trace devices for law enforcement purposes under ECPA and for purposes of foreign intelligence gathering under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-10-09
-
Privacy: An Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act [March 30, 2011]
"This report provides an overview of federal law governing wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). It also appends citations to state law in the area and the text of ECPA. It is a federal crime to wiretap or to use a machine to capture the communications of others without court approval, unless one of the parties has given his prior consent. It is likewise a federal crime to use or disclose any information acquired by illegal wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping. Violations can result in imprisonment for not more than five years; fines up to $250,000 (up to $500,000 for organizations); in civil liability for damages, attorneys' fees and possibly punitive damages; in disciplinary action against any attorneys involved; and in suppression of any derivative evidence. Congress has created separate, but comparable, protective schemes for electronic communications (e.g., email) and against the surreptitious use of telephone call monitoring practices such as pen registers and trap and trace devices. Each of these protective schemes comes with a procedural mechanism to afford limited law enforcement access to private communications and communications records under conditions consistent with the dictates of the Fourth Amendment. The government has been given narrowly confined authority to engage in electronic surveillance, conduct physical searches, and install and use pen registers and trap and trace devices for law enforcement purposes under ECPA and for purposes of foreign intelligence gathering under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2011-03-30
-
Bond v. United States: Validity and Construction of the Federal Chemical Weapons Statute [February 21, 2013]
"On January 18, 2013, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to again consider issues raised by Carol Bond's conviction under a statute enacted to implement the Convention on Chemical Weapons. Mrs. Bond argues that the implementing statute is inapplicable to her case, or alternatively, that the federal principles reflected in the Tenth Amendment render the implementing legislation unconstitutional. The case affords the Court the opportunity to provide guidance, beyond that of Justice Holmes' 'Missouri v. Holland' opinion, on the scope of the President's treaty making power and Congress's authority to enact treaty implementing legislation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-02-21
-
Cybersecurity: Cyber Crime Protection Security Act (S. 2111, 112th Congress)- A Legal Analysis [January 28, 2013]
"The Cyber Crime Protection Security Act (S. 2111) would enhance the criminal penalties for the cybercrimes outlawed in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). Those offenses include espionage, hacking, fraud, destruction, password trafficking, and extortion committed against computers and computer networks. S. 2111 contains some of the enhancements approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee when it reported the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act (S. 1151), S.Rept. 112-91 (2011). The bill would (1) establish a three-year mandatory minimum term of imprisonment for aggravated damage to a critical infrastructure computer; (2) streamline and increase the maximum penalties for the cybercrimes proscribed in CFAA; (3) authorize the confiscation of real property used to facilitate the commission of such cyberoffenses and permit forfeiture of real and personal property generated by, or used to facilitate the commission of, such an offense, under either civil or criminal forfeiture procedures; (4) add such cybercrimes to the racketeering (RICO) predicate offense list, permitting some victims to sue for treble damages and attorneys' fees; (5) increase the types of password equivalents covered by the trafficking offense and the scope of federal jurisdiction over the crime; (6) confirm that conspiracies to commit one of the CFAA offenses carry the same penalties as the underlying crimes; and (7) provide that a cybercrime prosecution under CFAA could not be grounded exclusively on the failure to comply with a term of service agreement or similar breach of contract or agreement, apparently in response to prosecution theory espoused in 'Drew.' With the exception of this last limitation on prosecutions, the Justice Department has endorsed the proposals found in S. 2111."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-01-28
-
Extraterritorial Application of American Criminal Law [February 15, 2012]
"Crime is ordinarily proscribed, tried, and punished according to the laws of the place where it occurs. American criminal law applies beyond the geographical confines of the United States, however, under certain limited circumstances. State prosecution for overseas misconduct is limited almost exclusively to multi-jurisdictional crimes, that is, crimes where some elements of the offense are committed within the state and others are committed beyond its boundaries. A surprising number of federal criminal statutes have extraterritorial application, but prosecutions have been few. This may be because when extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction does exist, practical and legal complications, and sometimes diplomatic considerations, may counsel against its exercise."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-02-15
-
Money Laundering: An Overview of 18 U.S.C. 1956 and Related Federal Criminal Law [February 8, 2012]
"Money laundering is commonly understood as the process of cleansing the taint from the proceeds of crime. In federal criminal law, however, it is more. In the principal federal criminal money laundering statutes, 18 U.S.C. 1956 and 1957, and to varying degrees in several other federal criminal statutes, money laundering involves the flow of resources to and from several hundred other federal, state, and foreign crimes. [...] Money laundering in some forms is severely punished, sometimes more severely than the underlying crime with which it is associated. The penalties frequently include not only long prison terms, but the confiscation of the property laundered, involved in the laundering, or traceable to the laundering. This is an overview of the elements and other legal attributes and consequences of a violation of Sections 1956 and 1957, as well as selected related federal criminal statutes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-02-08
-
Money Laundering: An Abridged Overview of 18 U.S.C. 1956 and Related Federal Criminal Law [February 8, 2012]
"Money laundering is commonly understood as the process of cleansing the taint from the proceeds of crime. In federal criminal law, however, it is more. In the principal federal criminal money laundering statutes, 18 U.S.C. 1956 and 1957, and to varying degrees in several other federal criminal statutes, money laundering involves the flow of resources to and from several hundred other federal, state, and foreign crimes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-02-08
-
Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act: Federal Contractor Criminal Liability Overseas [February 15, 2012]
"The United States government utilizes the services of hundreds of thousands of employees and contractors overseas. In some instances, U.S. agreements with the host nation preclude local prosecution of the crimes they commit. Federal law, as now written, does not always permit federal prosecution. The Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (H.R. 2136 and S. 1145) would fill some of the perceived gaps. The House bill, introduced by Representative Price, and the Senate bill, introduced by Senator Leahy and approved with amendments by the Senate Judiciary Committee, are very similar but not identical. They each address objections voiced concerning comparable proposals passed by the House during the 110th Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-02-15
-
Cybersecurity: Cyber Crime Protection Security Act (S. 2111)--A Legal Analysis [March 12, 2012]
"The Cyber Crime Protection Security Act (S. 2111) would enhance the criminal penalties for the cyber crimes outlawed in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). Those offenses include espionage, hacking, fraud, destruction, password trafficking, and extortion committed against computers and computer networks. S. 2111 contains some of the enhancements approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee when it reported the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act (S. 1151), S.Rept. 112-91 (2011). The bill would (1) establish a three-year mandatory minimum term of imprisonment for aggravated damage to a critical infrastructure computer; (2) streamline and increase the maximum penalties for the cyber crimes proscribed in CFAA; (3) authorize the confiscation of real property used to facilitate the commission of such cyber offenses and permit forfeiture of real and personal property generated by, or used to facilitate the commission of, such an offense, under either civil or criminal forfeiture procedures; (4) add such cyber crimes to the racketeering (RICO) predicate offense list, permitting some victims to sue for treble damages and attorneys' fees; (5) increase the types of password equivalents covered by the trafficking offense and the scope of federal jurisdiction over the crime; (6) confirm that conspiracies to commit one of the CFAA offenses carry the same penalties as the underlying crimes; and (7) provide that a cyber crime prosecution under CFAA could not be grounded exclusively on the failure to comply with a term of service agreement or similar breach of contract or agreement, apparently in response to prosecution theory espoused in 'Drew'. With the exception of this last limitation on prosecutions, the Justice Department has endorsed the proposals found in S. 2111. The bill has been placed on the Senate calendar. As of this date, S. 2111 has no House counterpart."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-03-12
-
Extraterritorial Application of American Criminal Law: An Abbreviated Sketch [February 15, 2012]
From the Document: "Crime is usually territorial. It is a matter of the law of the place where it occurs. Nevertheless, a number of American criminal laws apply outside of the United States. Application is generally a question of legislative intent, expressed or implied. In either case, it most often involves crimes committed aboard a ship or airplane, crimes condemned by international treaty, crimes committed against government employees or property, or crimes that have an impact in this country even if planned or committed in part elsewhere. 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. Searches and interrogations carried out on our behalf by 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 is an abridged version of a report, which with citations, footnotes, appendices, and bibliography appears as CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report 94-166, 'Extraterritorial Application of American Criminal Law,' by Charles Doyle."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-02-15
-
Abridged Sketch of Extradition To and From the United States [August 6, 2007]
"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 of the nations of the world, but there are many with whom it does not. This is an overview of those treaties and of the procedures followed in this country in response to an extradition request or to request extradition from another country. This is an abridged version of CRS Report 98-958, Extradition To and From the United States: Overview of the Law and Recent Treaties, by Charles Doyle, without the footnotes and citations to authority found in the longer report."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2007-08-06
-
Extraterritorial Application of American Criminal Law [Updated August 11, 2006]
From the Document: "Although the crimes 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. Searches and interrogations carried out on our behalf by 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. Our recently negotiated extradition treaties address some of the features of our earlier agreements which complicate extradition for extraterritorial offenses, i.e., dual criminality requirements and exemptions on the basis of nationality or political offenses. To further facilitate the prosecution of federal crimes with extraterritorial application Congress has enacted special venue, statute of limitations, and evidentiary statutes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2006-08-11
-
Federal Extraterritorial Criminal Jurisdiction: Legislation in the 109th Congress [Updated September 21, 2006]
"Crime is usually territorial. It is ordinarily a matter of the law of the place where it occurs. Nevertheless, a surprising number of American criminal laws apply outside of the United States. Application is generally a question of legislative intent, expressed or implied. Two statutes enacted in the 109th Congress have sections that enjoy extraterritorial application. The USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act, P.L. 109-177, includes a handful of crimes that feature explicit extraterritorial jurisdiction. The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, P.L. 109-164, carries the Mann Act (18 U.S.C. ch. 117) and the peonage laws (18 U.S.C. ch. 77) overseas under certain circumstances. Comparable pending legislation includes: Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act (H.R. 4437)(House passed); Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S. 2611)(Senate passed); !Telephone Records and Privacy Protection Act (H.R. 4709)(House passed); H.R. 5212 (relating to sexual offenses under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act); S. 1226 (relating to human trafficking by federal contractors); S. 2356 (relating to war profiteering); S. 2402 (relating to money laundering); S. 2361 (relating to war profiteering); S. 2368 (relating to alien smuggling); S. 2454 (relating to alien smuggling). In some instances the explicit statements of extraterritorial jurisdiction replicate the coverage the courts would have otherwise recognized. In some instances they expand extraterritorial jurisdiction beyond that which the courts would have recognize in the absence of a statement; in still others they appear to curtail it by mentioning some of the traditional grounds implicitly recognized and failing to mention others."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2006-09-21
-
Extraterritorial Application of American Criminal Law [Updated September 10, 2007]
"Crime is usually territorial. It is a matter of the law of the place where it occurs. Nevertheless, a surprising number of American criminal laws apply outside of the United States. Application is generally a question of legislative intent, expressed or implied. In either case, it most often involves crimes committed aboard a ship or airplane, crimes condemned by international treaty, crimes committed against government employees or property, or crimes that have an impact in this country even if planned or committed in part elsewhere. 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. Searches and interrogations carried out on our behalf by 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. […] Our recently negotiated extradition treaties address some of the features of our earlier agreements which complicate extradition for extraterritorial offenses, i.e., dual criminality requirements, reluctance to recognize extraterritorial jurisdiction, and exemptions on the basis of nationality or political offenses. To further facilitate the prosecution of federal crimes with extraterritorial application Congress has enacted special venue, statute of limitations, and evidentiary statutes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2007-09-10
-
Anti-Terrorism Authority under the Laws of the United Kingdom and the United States [September 7, 2006]
"This is a comparison of the laws of the United Kingdom and of the United States that govern criminal and intelligence investigations of terrorist activities. Both systems rely upon a series of statutory authorizations: in the case of the United States primarily the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act; in the case of the United Kingdom, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, the Police Act, the Intelligence Services Act. Among other differences, the U.S. procedures rely more heavily upon judicial involvement and supervision, while those of the UK employ other safeguards. The UK procedures afford greater latitude to arrest, detain and supervise suspected terrorists than those available in the United States."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles; Claire Feikert
2006-09-07
-
Obstruction of Justice: An Overview of Some of the Federal Statutes that Prohibit Interference with Judicial, Executive, or Legislative Activities [November 5, 2010]
"Obstruction of justice is the impediment of governmental activities. There are a host of federal criminal laws that prohibit obstructions of justice. The six most general outlaw obstruction of judicial proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1503), witness tampering (18 U.S.C. 1512), witness retaliation (18 U.S.C. 1513), obstruction of congressional or administrative proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1505), conspiracy to defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. 371), and contempt (a creature of statute, rule and common law). The laws that supplement, and sometimes mirror, the basic six tend to proscribe a particular means of obstruction. Some, like the perjury and false statement statutes, condemn obstruction by lies and deception. Others, like the bribery, mail fraud, and wire fraud statutes, prohibit obstruction by corruption. Some outlaw the use of violence as a means of obstruction. Still others ban the destruction of evidence. A few simply punish 'tipping off' those who are the targets of an investigation. Many of these offenses may also provide the basis for racketeering and money laundering prosecutions, and each provides the basis for criminal prosecution of anyone who aids and abets in or conspires for their commission."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2010-11-05
-
Obstruction of Congress: A Brief Overview of Federal Law Relating to Interference with Congressional Activities [November 5, 2010]
"Obstruction of justice is the impediment of governmental activities. There are a host of federal criminal laws that prohibit obstructions of justice. The six most general outlaw obstruction of judicial proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1503), witness tampering (18 U.S.C. 1512), witness retaliation (18 U.S.C. 1513), obstruction of congressional or administrative proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1505), conspiracy to defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. 371), and contempt (a creature of statute, rule and common law). All but Section 1503 cover congressional activities. The laws that supplement, and sometimes mirror, the basic six tend to proscribe a particular means of obstruction. Some, like the perjury and false statement statutes, condemn obstruction by lies and deception. Others, like the bribery, mail fraud, and wire fraud statutes, prohibit obstruction by corruption. Some outlaw the use of violence as a means of obstruction. Still others ban the destruction of evidence. A few simply punish 'tipping off' those who are the targets of an investigation. A good number of these apply in a congressional context. Many of these offenses may also provide the basis for racketeering and money laundering prosecutions, and each provides the basis for criminal prosecution of anyone who aids and abets in or conspires for their commission."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2010-11-05
-
Cybercrime: An Overview of the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Statute and Related Federal Criminal Laws [Updated June 28, 2005]
From the Summary: "The federal computer fraud and abuse statute, 18 U.S.C. 1030, protects federal computers, bank computers, and computers used in interstate and foreign commerce. It shields them from trespassing, threats, damage, espionage, and from being corruptly used as instruments of fraud. It is not a comprehensive provision, but instead it fills crack and gaps in the protection afforded by other federal criminal laws. This is a brief sketch of section 1030 and some of its federal statutory companions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles; Weir, Alyssa Bartlett
2005-06-28
-
Supervised Release: An Abbreviated Outline of Federal Law [February 14, 2011]
"Supervised release is the successor to parole in the federal criminal justice system. In 1984, Congress eliminated parole to create a more determinate federal sentencing structure. In its place, Congress instituted a system of supervised release, which applies to all federal crimes committed after November 1, 1987. Both parole and supervised release call for a period of supervision following release from prison and for reincarceration upon a failure to observe designated conditions. Parole ordinarily stands in lieu of a portion of the original term of imprisonment, while supervised release begins only after full service of the original term (less any 'good time' credits). Sentencing courts determine the terms and conditions of supervised release at the same time that they determine other components of an offender's sentence, and '[t]he duration, as well as the conditions of supervised release are components of a sentence.' Sentencing courts have 'broad discretion' when determining the duration and imposing the conditions for supervised release. In addition, except in specified drug and domestic violence cases, courts may technically exercise discretion to decline supervised release altogether for a particular defendant. However, the Sentencing Guidelines, promulgated by the United States Sentencing Commission, recommend that sentencing courts impose a term of supervised release in most felony cases. Supervised release terms begin when a prisoner is actually released, regardless of when he should have been released. Although a court may sentence an offender to several terms of supervised release for each of several crimes, the terms are served concurrently rather than consecutively. This rule applies even where criminal statutes require an offender to serve the multiple terms of imprisonment consecutively."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2011-02-14
-
Statutes of Limitation in Federal Criminal Cases: An Overview [April 9, 2007]
"A statute of limitations dictates the time period within which a legal proceeding must begin. The purpose of a statute of limitations in a criminal case is to ensure the prompt prosecution of criminal charges and thereby spare the accused of the burden of having to defend against stale charges after memories may have faded or evidence is lost. There is no statute of limitations for federal crimes punishable by death, nor for certain federal crimes of terrorism, nor, since passage of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (P.L. 109-248, H.R. 4472, 2006), for certain federal sex offenses. Prosecution for most other federal crimes must begin within five years of the commitment of the offense. There are exceptions. Some types of crimes are subject to a longer period of limitation; some circumstances suspend or extend the otherwise applicable period of limitation. Arson, art theft, certain crimes against financial institutions and various immigration offenses all carry statutes of limitation longer than the five year standard. Regardless of the applicable statute of limitations, the period may be extended or the running of the period suspended or tolled under a number of circumstances such as when the accused is a fugitive or when the case involves charges of child abuse, bankruptcy, wartime fraud against the government, or DNA evidence. Ordinarily, the statute of limitations begins to run as soon as the crime has been completed."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2007-04-09
-
Crime Victims' Rights Act: A Summary and Legal Analysis of 18 U.S.C. 3771 [April 24, 2012]
"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; and (8) the right to be treated fairly and with respect to one's dignity and privacy. 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. Conforming amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure became effective on December 1, 2008. The Justice Department promulgated implementing regulations on November 17, 2005. The text of Section 3771 is appended, as is that of Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-04-24
-
Crime Victims' Rights Act: A Sketch of 18 U.S.C. 3771 [April 24, 2012]
"The victims of federal crimes enjoy certain rights to notice, attendance, and participation in the federal criminal justice process by virtue of 18 U.S.C. 3771. More specifically, the section assures victims that they have: '(1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused. (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused. (3) The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court, after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding. (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding. (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case. (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law. (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy.' Corresponding amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure became effective on December 1, 2008."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2012-04-24
-
USA PATRIOT Act Sunset: A Sketch [January 7, 2004]
"Several sections of Title II of the USA PATRIOT Act (the Act) relating to enhanced foreign intelligence and law enforcement surveillance authority expire on December 31, 2005. Thereafter, the authority remains in effect only as it relates to foreign intelligence investigations begun before sunset or to offenses or potential offenses begun or occurring before that date. The temporary provisions are: sections 201 (wiretapping in terrorism cases), 202 (wiretapping in computer fraud and abuse felony cases), 203(b) (sharing wiretap information), 203(d) (sharing foreign intelligence information), 204 (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) pen register/trap & trace exceptions), 206 (roving FISA wiretaps), 207 (duration of FISA surveillance of non-United States persons who are agents of a foreign power), 209 (seizure of voicemail messages pursuant to warrants), 212 (emergency disclosure of electronic surveillance), 214 (FISA pen register/ trap and trace authority), 215 (FISA access to tangible items), 217 (interception of computer trespasser communications), 218 (purpose for FISA orders), 220 (nationwide service of search warrants for electronic evidence), 223 (civil liability and discipline for privacy violations), and 225 (provider immunity for FISA wiretap assistance). The sunset provision suggests two types of interpretative challenges: (1) what is a potential offense? (2) what is the impact of amendments enacted after the Act?"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2004-01-07
-
USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization in Brief [August 10, 2005]
"Both Houses have approved proposals to reauthorize USA PATRIOT Act sections scheduled to expire at the end of the year. […] This is a sketch of those bills and how they differ. Their common provisions deal mostly with expanded federal authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). The bills make permanent all but two of the temporary USA PATRIOT Act sections. They postpone the expiration of the two, dealing with FISA roving wiretaps and the so-call library or business records authority. In these two, the national security letter statutes, and some of the other USA PATRIOT Act provisions make sometimes parallel and sometimes individualistic adjustments. H.R. 3199 contains a number of features not found in S. 1389 including a first responder grant program, new capital offenses and adjusted capital punishment procedures, sections that in large measure replicate the seaport crimes portions of S. 378 (as reported), a substantial expansion in federal forfeiture authority in terrorism and money laundering cases, and expansion of federal wiretapping authority to embrace investigations into twenty crimes for which the authority did not previously exist. A more detailed version of this report is available as CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL33027, 'USA PATRIOT Act: Background and Comparison of House- and Senate-approved Reauthorization and Related Legislative Action'."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2005-08-10
-
Cybercrime: An Overview of the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Statute and Related Federal Criminal Laws [December 27, 2010]
From the Summary: "The federal computer fraud and abuse statute, 18 U.S.C. 1030, outlaws conduct that victimizes computer systems. It is a cyber security law. It protects federal computers, bank computers, and computers connected to the Internet. It shields them from trespassing, threats, damage, espionage, and from being corruptly used as instruments of fraud. It is not a comprehensive provision, but instead it fills cracks and gaps in the protection afforded by other federal criminal laws. This is a brief sketch of Section 1030 and some of its federal statutory companions, including the amendments found in the Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act, P.L. 110-326, 122 Stat. 3560 (2008) (H.R. 5938 (110th Cong.))."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2010-12-27
-
Terrorist Attacks on Commercial Airlines: Federal Criminal Prohibitions [January 22, 2010]
"Federal authorities can and have prosecuted terrorist attacks on commercial airlines under a wide variety of federal statutes. Some of those statutes outlaw crimes committed aboard a commercial airliner; some, crimes committed against the aircraft itself; others, crimes involving the use of firearms or explosives; still others, crimes committed for terrorist purposes. Within each category, the law reaches co-conspirators and other accomplices. Moreover, although most apply when committed within the United States, many apply to terrorist attacks overseas, particularly but necessarily, when the victims are Americans or U.S. airlines."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2010-01-22
-
Crime and Forfeiture [May 13, 2013]
"Forfeiture has long been an effective law enforcement tool. Congress and state legislatures have authorized its use for over two hundred years. Every year, it redirects property worth billions of dollars from criminal to lawful uses. Forfeiture law has always been somewhat unique. Legislative bodies, commentators and the courts, however, had begun to examine its eccentricities in greater detail because under some circumstances it could be not only harsh but unfair. The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA), P.L. [Public Law] 106-185, 114 Stat. 202 (2000), was a product of that reexamination. 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 which 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."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2013-05-13
-
National Security Letters in Foreign Intelligence Investigations: Legal Background and Recent Amendments [March 17, 2006]
"Five federal statutes authorize intelligence officials to request certain business record information in connection with national security investigations. The authority to issue these national security letters (NSLs) is comparable to the authority to issue administrative subpoenas. The USA PATRIOT Act expanded the authority under four of the NSL statutes and created the fifth. Thereafter, the authority has been reported to have been widely used. Prospects of its continued use dimmed, however, after two lower federal courts held the lack of judicial review and the absolute confidentiality requirements in one of the statutes rendered it constitutionally suspect. The USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act (H.R. 3199), P.L. 109-177, and its companion P.L. 109-178, amended the five NSL sections to expressly provide for judicial review of both the NSLs and the confidentiality requirements that attend them. The sections have also been made explicitly judicially enforceable and sanctions recognized for failure to comply with an NSL request or to breach NSL confidentiality requirements with the intent to obstruct justice. The use of the authority has been made subject to greater Congressional oversight."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2006-03-17
-
National Security Letters in Foreign Intelligence Investigations: Legal Background and Recent Amendments [Updated March 20, 2007]
"Five federal statutes authorize intelligence officials to request certain business record information in connection with national security investigations. The authority to issue these national security letters (NSLs) is comparable to the authority to issue administrative subpoenas. The USA PATRIOT Act expanded the authority under four of the NSL statutes and created the fifth. Thereafter, the authority has been reported to have been widely used. Prospects of its continued use dimmed, however, after two lower federal courts held the lack of judicial review and the absolute confidentiality requirements in one of the statutes rendered it constitutionally suspect. The USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act (H.R. 3199), P.L. 109-177, and its companion P.L. 109-178, amended the five NSL sections to expressly provide for judicial review of both the NSLs and the confidentiality requirements that attend them. The sections have also been made explicitly judicially enforceable and sanctions recognized for failure to comply with an NSL request or to breach NSL confidentiality requirements with the intent to obstruct justice. The use of the authority has been made subject to greater Congressional oversight."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Doyle, Charles
2007-03-20
