« Arizona-Type Issues Hitting Brooklyn | Main | Counsel's Failure To Object To Enhancements Under Career Offender Guidelines And ACCA Found To Constitute Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel »



The summary of the 2nd Circuit's ex post facto analysis provided above seems incorrect. Rather than conforming to the other circuits that have found no ex post facto problem with the application of the one-book rule "at least as applied to a series of similar offenses," the 2nd Circuit rests its analysis entirely on the operation of the one-book rule. The grouping rules, or similarity of offenses, is irrelevant to the analysis, as is evident in the majority's discussion and as is emphatically pressed in the dissent.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Email | RSS Feeds

Get Updates By Email

   Enter your email address:


www Blog

Links & Resources