Amicus Briefs Filed in 2005

The Amicus Curiae Committee’s mission is to provide amicus assistance on the federal and state level in those cases that present issues of importance to criminal defendants, criminal defense lawyers, and/or the criminal justice system as a whole. Membership in NACDL is not a prerequisite either for amicus assistance from the Committee, or for authorship of an NACDL amicus brief.

This is a sponsored ad

MyCase May2022

MyCase

Manage Your Law Firm All in One Place

Featured Products

Upcoming Events

Arthur Andersen, LLP v. United States

In this case, in which one of the last remaining big accounting firms was essentially driven out of business, the entire conviction hinged on edits made to one memo by one in-house lawyer--edits that any reasonable person would consider permissible and even necessary to the representation of a client. Among many other arguments, NACDL urged in its brief that the trial judge's jury instruction on obstruction of justice criminalized entirely lawful conduct.

Bell v. Thompson

NACDL amicus curiae brief.

Bradshaw v. Stumpf

NACDL amicus curiae brief arguing that a prosecutor's use of inconsistent theories in two capital cases involving the same murder, that is, identifying two different "shooters" in two separate trials against different defendants, denies a defendant of Due Process of law.

Davis v. Washington

Amicus curiae brief of the NACDL, the Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia.

Day v. McDonough

NACDL’s amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner.

Deck v. Missouri

Amicus curiae brief of the Bar Human Rights Committee of the Bar of England and Wales and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

Evans v. Chavis

Whether state supreme court’s denial of post-conviction relief was decision “on the merits” for federal post-conviction purposes where state court denied relief without comment.

Georgia v. Randolph

Whether the police may search a home based on putative consent of one occupant over express objection of a second occupant.

Gonzalez v. Crosby

NACDL amicus curiae brief. Whether the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA)'s habeas restrictions on second or successive petitions preclude the use of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) to reopen a final judgment. Successive habeas petitions and Rule 60(b) motions are distinct applications to the court, which serve different purposes, raise different issues, seek different relief, and thus do not overlap.

Halbert v. Michigan

Amicus curiae brief of NACDL and the National Association of Federal Defenders arguing that Michigan's law denying appointment of counsel on appeal to indigent defendants who plead guilty is unfair and unconstitutional.

Hammon v. Indiana

Amicus curiae brief of the NACDL and the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia.

Holmes v. South Carolina

NACDL amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner.

Maryland v. Blake

Whether officer’s threat constituted reinitiation of interrogation after defendant has unequivocally asserted right to have attorney present during questioning, in violation of Edwards v. Arizona.

Moussaoui v. United States

NACDL amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner. Government's refusal to produce defense witnesses it US custody in capital case violates defendant's Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process.

Padilla v. Hanft

NACDL amicus curiae brief in support of Jose Padilla's appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Padilla v. Hanft

NACDL amicus curiae brief in support of Jose Padilla’s petition for a writ of certiorari.

Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon

Amicus curiae brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Law Council of Australia in support of petitioner.

Sanchez-Villalobos v. United States

Amicus curiae brief of the Immigrant Defense Project of the New York State Defenders Association, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center arguing the U.S. Supreme Court should review the question of whether a state drug misdemeanor conviction is properly characterized as an “aggravated felony” by the Department of Homeland Security.

United States v. Brown

NACDL amicus curiae brief arguing that the appellants were prosecuted under novel theories that expanded the wire fraud statute, i.e., that the appellants engaged in a scheme to deprive Enron of a “property right” to receive a full and fair report of the corporation’s “full and accurate economic information” and deprived the company of an intangible right of honest services of its employees.

United States v. Frank Quattrone

Amici curiae brief by National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and California Attorneys for Criminal Justice.

RECENTLY ADDED & UPCOMING

Have a question?