tcdla - Voice For The Defense Online

er has no liberty interest in the lost privileges and such revocation isbased upon the prisoner's failu~e to accept responsibility for thiscrimes a part of a sec offender treatment program?***Both the Supreme Court and CCA were still an summer brakwhen this issue was prepared. HNo. 00-1519, United States v. Ralph Ariw, 9" Circuit1. Whether the court of appeals er~*oneously departed from thetotality-of-the-eircumstanu~s test that governs reasonable-suspiciondetermhtions under the Fourth Amendment by holding that sevenfacts observed by a law enforcement oBcer were entitled to no weightand could not be cansidered as a matter of law.2. Whether, under the lotaliq-of-the-circumstances test, the BorderPatrol agent in this mehad reasonable suspicion that justfied a stopof avehide near the Mexican border.No. 00-9280, WilJiam Kelly v. South Carolina, Supreme Court ofSouth Camlina (540 S.E.2d 851) (capital murder)Did the trial judge's rebsal to inform a capital defendant's sentencingjury that he woltld never be eligible for parole if the july sentencedhim fo life imprisonment, mthcr than to death, violate Mmmons v.South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 (1994)?The menlioned abwa aresyaopsas of opinions of Le appeals muns lmdSignilileaM Dwiiionr Repert wasrepomd byCynthia 1. Hamplon, Edmr Mke Chados Assislant Ediior1Weinnte ailmmmeots andconst~lvwilidsmfrom our membersandVoles for fhe Defense readwsPLEASE E-MAIL OR FAXJohn Canoil- WIICEEdiior .)canol!@ihemail.wm.210-829 0734TheSORS pnnlmg mst afunded hyThe Juddd BCoonTaining Fund andadminislared by theTexas Cwn of CfiminalAppeals