John T. Floyd Law Firm
Houston Criminal Lawyer
"Serious Criminal Defense Throughout Texas"
Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer
Trials, Sentencings and Appeals
Federal And State Criminal Defense
Phone # (713) 224-0101
Toll Free 1-866-374-1327
E-mail jfloyd@JohnTFloyd.com
Top Lawyers: Criminal Defense - 2008, 2009 HTexas
POST-CONVICTION ISSUES
![[Valid RSS]](images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed"){kind=small}
POST-CONVICTION ISSUES
July 14, 2009
THE DIFFICULTIES FACED IN INSANITY CASES
Lawyer Ineffective for Failure to Investigate, Request Medical Records Indicating Possible Insanity; (Be careful what you ask for…)
By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Spencer Ojeifo Imoudu was not a normal individual. In August 2005 the Bexar County resident stole a vehicle parked outside a pawn shop. The vehicle belonged to the owner of the pawn shop. He, and another witness, saw Imoudu get in the vehicle and drive off. The two men raced to the witness’s truck and sped away after Imoudu. During the high speed chase, Imoudu turned into oncoming traffic, crashing head on into an oncoming vehicle. The driver of the other vehicle was killed. Imoudu was arrested and charged with felony murder and manslaughter. He eventually pled guilty to the two charges in exchange for a 17-year sentence with an affirmative finding of a deadly weapon. 1/ more...
November 23, 2008
RIGHT TO EXPUNCTION OF CRIMINAL RECORD UNDER § 55.01
By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Criminal Defense Lawyers often get call from potential clients wanting their criminal records expunged/destroyed. However, the expunction statute in Texas is very specific and applies only to records of arrest when a case against a defendant is dismissed with no probation, no billed by a grand jury, acquitted by the trial court or the court of criminal appeals or the result of identity theft. more...
December 12, 2008
PROBATION ELIGIBILITY: NEW LIMITATIONS
By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Community supervision, or probation as most people know it, has been defined by federal courts as an “imprisonment substitute” because the criminal sentence is not served in a penal institution. See: United States v. Elkins, 176 F.3d 1016, 1020 (7th Cir. 1999). more...
October 24, 2008
THE JUDICIAL WARS INVOKED BY CRACK SENTENCING
By: Criminal Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John T. Floyd and Senior Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, a federal district court judge must consider each of the factors prescribed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) when imposing an appropriate criminal sentence. The § 3553 factors are: more...
August 28, 2008
FEDERAL SENTENCING: DISCRETION MAKES A COMBACK
By: Criminal Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John T. Floyd and Senior Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Before 1984, criminal sentencing in federal courts was heavily criticized because of the disparate sentences imposed for similar conduct and because of the uncertainty as to the length of time offenders would actually serve in prison. But Congress changed all that with the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. The Act was designed to produce a more even-handed determinate sentencing scheme. To accomplish this legislative objective, the Act imposed an absolute duty on federal district court judges to consider each of the seven sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), required federal judges to accept the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines as mandatory, and abolished the federal parole system as well. The end result of the Act, however, quickly proved to be even more draconian than hodgepodge sentencing practices it had replaced. Federal prison sentences grew longer because of the mandatory Guidelines, and because of the abolition of parole, longer stays in federal prison became the order of the day. more...
December 19. 2007
SUPREME COURT CRACKS BARRIER ON CRACK SENTENCING
By: Criminal Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John T. Floyd and Senior Paralegal Billy Sinclair
The United States Supreme Court on December 10, 2007 issued a ruling in a case that will effectively reduce some of the crack cocaine sentences for nearly twenty thousand federal inmates – 85 percent of them African-American. See: Kimbrough v. United States, No. 06-6330 (2007). The following day the U.S. Sentencing Commission voted to allow these inmates to immediately apply for sentence reductions. Slightly more than 2500 of them will be eligible for early release over the next year. More...
October 17, 2007
SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE THE 100:1 CRACK/POWDER COCAINE RATIO
By: Criminal Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John T. Floyd and Senior Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Derrick Kimbrough was arrested in Norfolk, Virginia on two offenses involving of possession crack and powder cocaine as well as a single firearm offense. State authorities dismissed their case in favor of federal prosecution. The federal drug offenses exposed Kimbrough to a sentence range of 10 years to life imprisonment and a mandatory sentence range of 5 years to life imprisonment on the firearm offense to be served consecutively. More...
October 9, 2007
CRIMINAL ATTORNEYS STILL WATCHING THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, DECISIONS EFFECTING SENTENCING GUIDELINES
By: Criminal Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John T. Floyd and Senior Paralegal Billy Sinclair
While the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Booker gave many defense attorneys hope that the often draconian Sentencing Guidelines would soon be pronounced dead, they still remain largely intact. Judges must still consult and consider the guidelines and, with Rita’s “presumption of reasonable” standard, any sentence they hand down within the guidelines will most likely withstand appellate review. However, the Supreme Court has created a real opening for “thorough adversarial testing” of the sentencing procedure by allowing judges to depart from the guidelines if given good reason under the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553. Defense attorneys must take this opportunity to effectively present their clients’ best case at sentencing before the federal courts. After all, criminal defendants and their offenses of conviction are unique and individual and should be treated as such by the courts when assessing a just punishment. More...
July 17, 2007
THE CRACK COCAINE LEGACY: PUINISHMENT DISPARITY IN THE FEDERAL COURTS
By: Criminal Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John T. Floyd and Senior Paralegal Billy Sinclair
In 1986 University of Maryland basketball sensation Len Bias was found dead from a cocaine overdose. Despite toxicology reports showing that the drug overdose resulted from powder cocaine, media reports connected the basketball star’s death to a “crack” cocaine overdose and continued to spread that misperception. More...
July 2, 2007
THE SLIPPERY SLOPE OF POST-CONVICTION APPEALS
By: Criminal Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John T. Floyd and Senior Paralegal Billy Sinclair
The first, and perhaps most important, statute a criminal defendant should become aware of following an arrest is Rule 103 of the Texas Rules of Evidence. Rule 103(a)(1) requires that an objection be made to any pretrial, trial or post-trial error in order for it to be heard on direct appeal. A criminal defendant should stress to his attorney, whether appointed or retained, that he/she expects the attorney to object to any adverse rulings made by the trial court throughout the criminal proceedings against the defendant. While some of the objections clearly will not have a basis in law, the defense attorney should nonetheless make the objection, research the issue, and be prepared to present it on direct appeal. The failure to object by a defense attorney will haunt a criminal defendant throughout the post-conviction process.
More...
[ Back to top ]
