Published
US v. Smith, No. 08-8019, 6/18/09 - Convictions for tax evasion, submitting fictitious obligations and lying in bankruptcy petition affirmed. 1) Excluding the time between the filing of pretrial motions and a brief hearing on the motions during a status conference was proper, so no speedy trial violation; and 2) no abuse of discretion in asking witnesses questions submitted by jurors because they were merely clarifying and benign questions.
Unpublished
US v. Jackson, No. 08-3317, 6/17/09 - Conviction for possessing shanks by a prisoner was a crime of violence for career offender purposes.
US v. Barwig, No. 08-3062, 6/17/09 - A divided panel of the 10th reverses as plain error imposition of 5-year stat max sentence for violating terms of supervised release on defendant originally convicted of making a false statement. She was originally placed on probation, but violated it. The court then gave her a term of home confinement, followed by two years of supervised release. She violated that, too but, since the court had placed her on supervised release instead of continuing her on probation, it was limited to the statutory maximum of two years under 18 USC §3583(e)(3). The court had clearly announced from the bench that it was placing her on supervised release, and that controls over a later written order in which the court stated that it had revoked and reinstated probation. Judge Murphy found the record of the second revocation hearing ambiguous as to whether the court really meant to put defendant on supervised release, concluded that the court actually intended to reinstate probation, and would have affirmed.
US v. Tom, No. 08-2175, 6/18/09 - 70 month sentence for second degree murder of newborn, where guidelines range was 168-210 months, affirmed as substantively reasonable. This is a grisly and tragic case. Defendant, who was barely 18 years old and mildly retarded, assisted his 15 year old girlfriend in cutting the throat of their baby that had literally just been born. The couple lived with the girl’s mother, who had threatened to throw them out if her daughter got pregnant. The girl had pled prior to defendant’s trial and got 44 months. This was a big part of the court’s reasoning for varying downward as much as it did. It’s pretty clear that the 10th disapproved of the sentence, but in light of Gall and the district court’s explanation of the reasons for its sentence, it felt constrained to affirm it.
US v. Smith, No. 08-8019, 6/18/09 - Convictions for tax evasion, submitting fictitious obligations and lying in bankruptcy petition affirmed. 1) Excluding the time between the filing of pretrial motions and a brief hearing on the motions during a status conference was proper, so no speedy trial violation; and 2) no abuse of discretion in asking witnesses questions submitted by jurors because they were merely clarifying and benign questions.
Unpublished
US v. Jackson, No. 08-3317, 6/17/09 - Conviction for possessing shanks by a prisoner was a crime of violence for career offender purposes.
US v. Barwig, No. 08-3062, 6/17/09 - A divided panel of the 10th reverses as plain error imposition of 5-year stat max sentence for violating terms of supervised release on defendant originally convicted of making a false statement. She was originally placed on probation, but violated it. The court then gave her a term of home confinement, followed by two years of supervised release. She violated that, too but, since the court had placed her on supervised release instead of continuing her on probation, it was limited to the statutory maximum of two years under 18 USC §3583(e)(3). The court had clearly announced from the bench that it was placing her on supervised release, and that controls over a later written order in which the court stated that it had revoked and reinstated probation. Judge Murphy found the record of the second revocation hearing ambiguous as to whether the court really meant to put defendant on supervised release, concluded that the court actually intended to reinstate probation, and would have affirmed.
US v. Tom, No. 08-2175, 6/18/09 - 70 month sentence for second degree murder of newborn, where guidelines range was 168-210 months, affirmed as substantively reasonable. This is a grisly and tragic case. Defendant, who was barely 18 years old and mildly retarded, assisted his 15 year old girlfriend in cutting the throat of their baby that had literally just been born. The couple lived with the girl’s mother, who had threatened to throw them out if her daughter got pregnant. The girl had pled prior to defendant’s trial and got 44 months. This was a big part of the court’s reasoning for varying downward as much as it did. It’s pretty clear that the 10th disapproved of the sentence, but in light of Gall and the district court’s explanation of the reasons for its sentence, it felt constrained to affirm it.
posted by Anonymous at 8:53 AM
<< Home