Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

In the Courts

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
January 03, 2006

Fifth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Booker

In United States v. Gentry, No. 04-11221 (5th Cir. Dec. 8, 2005), the Fifth Circuit, in a case of first impression, rejected the defendant's bid to apply United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), retroactively on collateral review to an initial 28 U.S.C. ' 2255 motion. While Booker was pending, the defendant, convicted on drug charges, filed and lost a ' 2255 motion to vacate, correct or set aside her sentence. She later appealed, arguing that the Fifth Circuit should apply Booker retroactively to her case.

The Fifth Circuit found that Booker established a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure and noted that Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), controlled the retroactive application of such rules. Applying Teague, the court explained that new constitutional rules of criminal procedure are not generally applied retroactively unless the rule fits into one of two exceptions. The first exception, new rules that place certain conduct or persons “beyond the State's power to punish” is not implicated by Booker. The second exception is for “watershed rules” that implicate the fundamental fairness of the proceeding. The court went on to find that altering the degree of flexibility judges have in applying the Sentencing Guidelines and shifting fact-finding duties from the judge to the jury do not constitute a watershed change and that, therefore, Booker should not be given retroactive effect.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.