Five of the six United States courts of appeals that have passed upon the issue presented by this case have decided it adversely to the position urged by the respondent here.
There was no allegation in the indictment and no attempt by the prosecution to show that either firearm had been United states v bass "in commerce or affecting commerce. If the decision of the court of appeals is permitted to stand and is followed by other courts, the government will be forced to make the untenable choice of either exposing its highly sensitive internal prosecutorial deliberations to public view or abandoning pursuit of the death penalty in cases for which that penalty has been authorized by Congress and approved by the Attorney General.
Since Title IV also prohibits convicted criminals from transporting firearms in interstate commerce, the two Titles overlap under both readings. The wording of the substantive offense has remained identical, although the original Act had a provision that possession of a firearm "shall be presumptive evidence that such firearm or ammunition was shipped or transported or received [in interstate or foreign commerce].
Pauley argued the cause for the United States. In light of our disposition of the case, we do not reach the question whether, upon appropriate findings, Congress can constitutionally punish the "mere possession" of firearms; thus, we need not consider the relevance, in that connection, of our recent decision in Perez v.
In the course of checking to see if anyone was hiding under the bed, he lifted the box springs. Officers Ellis and Headen then entered the apartment without permission and commanded the man to appear.
Under the protocol, the individual United States Attorneys offices retain discretion in only three areas: Within a minute of the telephone call, he located James at the D building of 33 Carver Street. The amendment received only passing mention in the House discussion of the bill, Cong.
See United States v. Bass also requested all materials submitted to the Attorney General for death-eligible prosecutions between January 1, and September 1,as well as captions and case numbers of such cases, a description of the offense charged, and the ultimate disposition of the case.
The court acknowledged that, under United States v. The statute, 18 U. If the United States again fails to comply, the district court remains free to impose whatever sanction it deems appropriate under the circumstances.
Here, as in other cases, the various remarks by legislators "are sufficiently ambiguous insofar as this narrow issue is concerned.
Accordingly, it contends that the district court abused its discretion in ordering the United States to produce the relevant documents.
This timely appeal followed. Third, the Survey showed that two of the three death-eligible offenses charged most frequently against whites and blacks were the same, but that the percentages by race of those charged with each crime were vastly different.
Of the seventeen defendants charged with a death-eligible crime in the Eastern District of Michigan, none were white and fourteen were black the other three were Hispanic.
Bass argues that there was no evidence before the district court that he fired his gun at anyone. United States, supra, we will not be quick to assume that Congress has meant to effect a significant change in the sensitive relation between federal and state criminal jurisdiction.
Although the court did not point to evidence of similarly situated white persons who were not charged, it reasoned that the "similarly situated" requirement was satisfied by evidence that the United States enters plea bargains with one-half of the white defendants against whom it sought the death penalty, but only one-quarter of the black defendants against whom it sought the death penalty.
The Review Committee made an independent recommendation, and the Attorney General made the final decision whether to seek the death penalty. For example, a person "possesses. The statistics show that, over a five year period, those 93 United States Attorneys, independently making decisions involving infinite factual variations, collectively charged twice as many black defendants as white defendants with capital-eligible offenses.
Bass but whose race was different. The United States charges blacks with a death eligible offense more than twice as often as it charges whites. The United States refused to comply with the discovery order.In making this determination, the court decided that Bass's conviction pursuant to Tennessee Code § was a crime of violence.
“Legal conclusions regarding application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines are reviewed de novo.” United States v. Hover, F.3d(6th Cir) (emphasis omitted). The Supreme Court of the United States handed down nine per curiam opinions during its term, which began October 1, and concluded October 6,  Because per curiam decisions are issued from the Court as an institution, these opinions all lack the attribution of authorship or joining votes to specific justices.
In United States v. Armstrong, U. S.(), we held that a defendant who seeks discovery on a claim of selective prosecution must show some evidence of both discriminatory effect and discriminatory intent.
Decision for United States Per Curiam opinion. The defendant must make a credible showing of discriminatory effect and intent, which Bass did not do in this case.
Donofrio, F.2d (CA5 ); Stevens v. United States, F.2d (CA6 ) (one judge dissenting); United States v. Synnes, F.2d (CA8 ); United States v. Daniels, F.2d (CA9 ). The result reached by the Second Circuit in this case has also been reached in United States v.
Harbin, mi-centre.com 50 (ND Ind. The Virginia TBF Youth is Virginia's premier youth bass fishing program. Our program is designed to educate the youth anglers about the sport of bass fishing as well as environmental conservation.
We welcome all anglers to join from ages years old. We have a junior and high school program.Download