The full library in alphabetical order, across every area of law.
Trial competency is measured at the present moment and turns on functional capacity rather than diagnosis. The federal statute frames it as an inability, caused by mental disease or defect, to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings or to assist properly in the defense. Competence is presumed, the finding is made by a preponderance, and a state may not demand that a defendant prove incompetence by clear and convincing evidence.
A federal grand jury subpoena issues under Rule 17 in the name of the court, signed in blank by the clerk and completed by the government. It may command testimony, the production of designated material, or both. The return date fixes when the obligation matures and starts the practical clock for any objection. Nonappearance and refusal to produce are addressed through the court's contempt power and through civil confinement for a recalcitrant witness.
In federal court a motion to suppress must be raised before trial under Rule 12(b)(3)(C), on a deadline set at or after arraignment, with an untimely motion considered only for good cause. The papers must allege definite, specific and non-conjectural facts, usually by affidavit, and a hearing follows only where a contested issue of material fact is raised. The burden shifts with the theory, and the remedy is bounded by independent source, inevitable discovery, attenuation and good faith.
Transfer occurs by judicial waiver after a hearing, by statutory exclusion that removes an offense from juvenile jurisdiction outright, or by a prosecutor's election to file directly in criminal court. A waiver hearing requires notice, counsel, access to the records the court relies on, and a statement of reasons. California requires clear and convincing evidence of unsuitability; Ohio separates mandatory from discretionary transfer.
Benefit applications are adjudicated on the facts existing at decision, and applicants are questioned again at interview about arrests and convictions. A disposition entered while the request is pending can convert an accurate answer into an inaccurate one, can trigger a duty to update, and can move an applicant from eligible to barred. The lever available to defense counsel is not the agency's calendar but the criminal court's, which is why a continuance is the practical tool.
Touch samples contain very little material, and modern chemistry can type it. People shed at markedly different rates, DNA moves between hands, objects and surfaces without direct contact, and frequently handled items carry background from many people. Contamination can also enter at collection, packaging or in the laboratory. A sub-source statistic addresses whose DNA is present and supplies no information about the activity that placed it there.
A lawful permanent resident returning from abroad is ordinarily not regarded as seeking admission, but a resident who has committed an offense in the criminal inadmissibility categories loses that treatment and is examined as an applicant. Because the inadmissibility list is not identical to the deportability list, a conviction that created no removal exposure at home can stop the same client on re-entry, which makes advice about travel part of the criminal representation.
A departure applies a ground recognized in the guidelines to move above or below the calculated range, and Rule 32(h) requires notice where a court contemplates one on a ground not raised by the parties. A variance rests on the statutory sentencing factors and needs no guideline authorization or advance notice. Both must be explained, and the explanation grows more substantial as the sentence moves further. Review examines the calculation for procedural error and the result for reasonableness.
A person arrested as a fugitive may consent in writing, before a judge, to return to the demanding state without a governor's warrant. The judge must first explain the right to require the warrant and the right to seek habeas corpus. Waiver surrenders only the asylum state proceeding, not any defense, and a request for final disposition under the detainer compact operates as a waiver by statute.
An immigration detainer is a request addressed to a custodian, not an order addressed to a defendant, and jurisdictions have divided on whether to honor one at all. Its practical effect on the criminal case is severe regardless: the defendant sits in another agency's custody, transport depends on interagency arrangement rather than judicial order, absences appear on the record as failures to appear, and warrants issue against a person who is already detained.
Rule 11(c)(1) allows the government to agree to dismiss charges, to recommend a particular disposition, or to agree that a specific sentence is the appropriate disposition. The first and third bind the court once accepted; the second does not, and the defendant must be told a recommendation carries no right to withdraw if the court declines it. Guideline calculation, restitution and other sovereigns lie outside any agreement.
Relief granted because a defendant completed probation, stayed out of trouble, or deserved a fresh start does not disturb the federal definition of conviction. Only an order resting on a legal or constitutional defect in the original proceeding removes the judgment for immigration purposes. Sealing changes who can see the record; it does not change what the record is, and a certified disposition can still be produced.
