|
Blakely and Booker/Fanfan: Opinions and other information
Fifth Circuit
Post-Booker/Fanfan Decisions
- Infante, 5th Cir. 3/21/05 (error did not affect def's substantial rights where sentence mid-range and
nothing in record indicating judge would have sentenced differently)
- Akpan, 5th Cir. 4/14/05 (remand, error preserved where def. objected to
loss amount; gov. couldn't prove beyond reas. doubt that court wouldn't have sent. def. differently)
- Herandez-Gonzalez, 5th Cir. 3/30/05 (Booker claim first raised in
pet. for rehearing, def. could not show plain error occurred much less extraordinary circumstances)
- Bringier, 5th Cir. 3/31/05 (plain error review even though def. challenged
aggravating role increase at trial and on appeal, def. could not show affected his substantial rights)
- Villegas, 5th Cir. 3/17/05 (although std. of review is now reasonableness,
guideline review std. is de novo, discusses other courts that have so held)
- Holmes, 5th Cir. 4/5/05 (Booker error where jury did not find perjury/obstruction
of justice enhancement, guilt verdict not sufficient finding that def. committed perjury)
- Curry, 5th Cir. 3/15/05 (declined to consider Booker claims since def. sentenced to
statutory max based on prior conviction)
- Mares, 5th Cir. 3/4/05 (discussing what "consideration"
of guidelines entails)
- Montgomery, 5th Cir. 3/1/05 (declining to address
Booker ACCA claim since court found prior not "violent felony)
- Larry, N.D. Tex. 1/19/05 (2255, not within Teague exception since
new rule of criminal procedure, not retroactive)
- Godines, N.D. Tex. 1/27/05 (2241, magistrate recommending
be denied since should be construed as 2255 and Booker not retroactive)
- Rodriguez, N.D. Tex. 1/27/05 (magistrate recommended
that 2241 be construed as 2255 and denied since Booker not made retroactive; no juris.)
- Lindsey, N.D. Tex. 1/31/05 (magistrate recommend that 2241 be
denied, pet. did not demonstrate that savings clause in 2255 applied/Booker not made retroactive)
- King, N.D.Tex. 1/27/05 (2255, Blakely/Booker did not implicate def.'s conviction
and Booker not retroactive when first raised on collateral review)
- Massey, N.D. Tex. 1/26/05 (second 2255, recommend that be
dismissed w/o prejudice because not moved in 5th Cir. for permission to file)
- Owens v. VanBuren, N.D. Tex. 2/7/05 (2241, Booker claim raised
first in def.'s traverse to gov. response would not be considered)
- Palmer, N.D. Tex. 2/9/05 (2255, untimely, 11 months after
conviction became final, denies request for equitable tolling, ct. confuses date for 1st and 2nd 2255)
Post-Blakely, Pre-Booker/Fanfan Decisions
|
|