U. S. Supreme Court Happenings and Favorable Federal Circuit Opinions for the Week of May 13-17, 2024--

U. S. Supreme Court Happenings– Week ending May 17, 2024 –

The Justices held their May 16, 2024 conference. We expect Orders on May 20, 2024.

There were no opinions this week which affected criminal matters. The Supreme Court has about 7 weeks to issue over 40 opinions in cases argued this Term if it is going to wrap its work before the start of July (as is its yearly custom). That means we could and should expect about five or six rulings per week, on average, though we expect we will get fewer than that number through May and perhaps a lot more the last few weeks of June. Any relevant opinions will be posted here.

Favorable Federal Circuit Opinions for the Week of May 13-17, 2024 –

1st Circuit

United States v. Villa-Guillen, (No. 21-1545)(1st Cir. May 17, 2024)– After a short trial consisting of almost no physical evidence, a jury convicted Ricardo Villa-Guillen ("Villa") of conspiring to traffic cocaine from Puerto Rico to the continental United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. On appeal, Villa alleged an array of errors in the district court proceedings. The Court agreed with Villa that two of the district court's evidentiary rulings led to prejudicial error. Those rulings involved types of evidence that are likely to lead a jury astray -- the admission of a letter discussing Villa's potential interest in a plea deal, which the government claimed was tantamount to a confession, and the admission of testimony suggesting that Villa was more likely to have committed this crime because he had supposedly participated in a different drug transaction (for which he was never charged). The Court therefore reversed and ordered a new trial.

2d Circuit

United States v. Frias, et. al., (Nos. 22-1804(L), 22-3083(Con))(2d Cir. May 16, 2024)– Raphael Frias appeals his sentence after entering a guilty plea to fentanyl trafficking charges. He argued that the district court (Suddaby, J.) erred in calculating his respective Guidelines range. Specifically, Frias argued that the district court wrongly applied a two point increase to his criminal history score under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d) after finding that he was on parole at the time of the offense and he also contends that the district court improperly applied a four level increase under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a) for being an “organizer or leader” of the scheme and failed to adequately consider his mitigating evidence in declining to vary downwards. The Court found that Frias was not an organizer or leader and vacated and remanded Frias’s sentence for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

United States v. Barrett, (No. 21-1379)(2s Cir. May 15, 2024)– On appeal of an amended judgment entered on remand in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Sullivan, J.), defendant Dwayne Barrett argued that (1) his initial appellate counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to mount a sufficiency challenge to his conviction on one count of substantive Hobbs Act robbery, and related firearms and murder counts, on the ground that the evidence demonstrated only attempted robbery; and (2) in any event, after United States v. Taylor, 596 U.S. 845 (2022), Hobbs Act robbery cannot be identified as a categorical crime of violence; The court, where it is obliged to identify error by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lora v. United States, 599 U.S. 453 (2023), vacated and remanded for resentencing.

8th Circuit

United States v. Willis, (No. 23-1547)(8th Cir. May 13, 2024)--Charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm, Anthony Willis filed a letter that the magistrate judge construed as a motion to remove his appointed counsel and to proceed pro se. After a Faretta hearing, the magistrate judge concluded that Willis was competent to represent himself and had knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to counsel. The magistrate judge granted Willis’s request to represent himself, appointed standby counsel, and warned Willis that his right to self representation could be revoked if he conducted himself in an obstructive or disruptive manner. Months later, after extensive pretrial proceedings dominated by Willis’s repeated assertion of “sovereign citizen” arguments and defenses, the parties appeared for a final pretrial conference the morning of trial. When Willis ignored a warning and again asserted his sovereign citizen theories and defenses, the district court ruled, “You have forfeited your right to represent yourself” -- standby counsel “is going to represent you now. ” A jury convicted Willis, and the district court sentenced him to 228 months imprisonment. On appeal, the Court concluded that the district court erred in revoking Willis’s constitutional right of self-representation on the eve of trial because of his repeated assertion of judicially-rejected sovereign citizen theories and defenses. “An impermissible denial of self-representation cannot be harmless.” The Court reversed the judgment of the district court and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Latest Bureau of Prison’s Statistics (From BOP Website):

Fair Sentencing/Retroactive Sentence Reductions 4,142 Orders Granted to date.
Elderly Offender Home Confinement 1,246. Approved to date.
First Step Act Releases 33,033 granted to date.
Compassionate Releases/Reduction in Sentences 4,941 granted to date.
Population in RRC’s 8,282.
Population in Home Confinement 5,021.

COMMENT:

Please note below that Lily will be taking over Carina’s position for Spanish Speaking clients. We can help anyone interested in putting together a package to apply for clemency or pardons. The better the package, the better the chance. In the past, we have had many people get clemencies, computations of sentences and a few pardons.

We are still receiving a great amount of people wanting to find out if they qualify for any of the new USSG Amendments such 814 and 821. Our FREE LOOK program ended Monday, April 1, 2024. We had hundreds of inquiries, but not many people actually qualified. Instead, we suggest that you opt for a Written Case Evaluation (“WCE”) as soon as possible to determine all remedies available to you to gain relief including all of the recent Amendments.

For the last 30 years, we have been very successful. We can help on direct appeals, 2255 motions, 2241 Petitions, First Step Act and Compassionate Release Motions, Earned Time Credits, DC Superior Court Petitions, State Post Conviction, Clemencies and Pardons and other specialized motions to mention a few avenues for relief we cover. The WCE is an excellent low cost tool to see what can be done for you at any stage of the proceedings. It is thorough and detailed from day one of your case to present with our recommendations of any remedies available to gain relief.

If you are serious about fighting your case and want us to evaluate your case to see if you may have relief coming, request a Written Case Evaluation.