Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A federal grand jury in the Middle District of Pennsylvania handed down a 48-count indictment against former Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas Judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella. [60] The judges were charged with RICO after allegedly committing acts of mail and wire fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, and honest services fraud.
The Guidelines are the product of the United States Sentencing Commission, which was created by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. [3] The Guidelines' primary goal was to alleviate sentencing disparities that research had indicated were prevalent in the existing sentencing system, and the guidelines reform was specifically intended to provide for determinate sentencing.
Federal prosecutions of public corruption under the Hobbs Act (enacted 1934), the mail and wire fraud statutes (enacted 1872), including the honest services fraud provision, the Travel Act (enacted 1961), and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (enacted 1970) began in the 1970s. "Although none of these statutes was ...
The Georgia RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act is a law in the U.S. state of Georgia that makes a form of racketeering a felony. [1] Originally passed on March 20, 1980, it is known for being broader than the corresponding federal law, such as not requiring a monetary profit to have been made via the action for it to be a crime.
[17] The "Drugs Minus Two Amendment" changed the U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines to "reduce the applicable sentencing guideline range for most federal drug trafficking offenses." [ 17 ] The Commission voted to make the Amendment retroactive on July 18, 2014, "thereby allowing eligible offenders serving a previously imposed term of ...
Two of the charges were for filing the false electoral documents with the federal U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, and the other was for a filing in the case Trump v. Kemp in the same court. McAfee ruled that because the documents were filed in a federal court, they could not be prosecuted under state laws. [72]
The Federal Sentencing Guidelines were promulgated by a sentencing commission; the Washington sentencing guidelines at issue in Blakely, by contrast, were enacted by that state's legislature. That distinction, the Court said, "lacked constitutional significance," because regardless of the body that set the rules, the rules required sentencing ...
The Federal Sentencing Guidelines are non-binding independent agency recommendations that inform sentencing in law. [5] Courts consider these advisory forms , which contain maximum and minimum sentences , before deciding a defendant's sentence.