Criminal Law & Process – Page 167 – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Cert Grant: What Is “Knowing” Identity Theft?

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:October 20, 2008
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Federal Criminal Law & Process U.S. Supreme Court

A federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1028A, imposes a mandatory two-year prison sentence on defendants who “knowingly” use “a means of identification of another person” in the course of committing a felony. The two years is in addition to the sentence imposed for the underlying felony. But what exactly does the word “knowingly” refer to in the statute: is it enough that the defendant knew that he was using a means of identification, or must the government also prove that the defendant knew the identification belonged to another person? This is the question raised in a case that the Supreme Court agreed to hear earlier today, United States v. Flores-Figueroa. The unpublished opinion below can be found at 2008 WL 1808508.

SCOTUS Blog summarizes the facts as follows:

Seventh Circuit Week in Review

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:October 19, 2008
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Federal Criminal Law & Process Seventh Circuit

Beginning with this post, I will provide a regular weekend review of new Seventh Circuit opinions in criminal cases. The past week was actually very quiet on the criminal front, with only one new opinion (and that one not especially significant in terms of discussing or modifying the law). In United States v. Jackson, the three defendants were convicted of mail fraud in connection with a scheme to bilk their car insurance carriers by submitting false theft claims. The Seventh Circuit had little apparent difficulty in affirming the convictions over the defendants’ arguments that the evidence was insufficient, that material evidence had been withheld by the government, and that evidence of a prior conviction had been improperly admitted.

Time for Racial Impact Statements in Wisconsin?

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:October 16, 2008
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Race & Law

As reported in the new issue of Sentencing Times, Iowa and Connecticut adopted new laws earlier this year that call for the preparation of racial impact statements as sentencing bills are working their way through the state legislative process. In many states, it is already required that fiscal and environmental impact statements be prepared for new legislative proposals, but Iowa and Connecticut are the first to adopt a similar policy with respect to racial concerns. This seems like a good idea for other states to consider–particularly states like Wisconsin with glaring racial disparities in their prison populations. Of course, the fact that a sentencing proposal might exacerbate racial disparities would not (and should not) necessarily preclude its adoption, but the debate over such proposals would benefit from more self-conscious and well-informed attention to their racial impacts.