|
Blakely and Booker/Fanfan: Opinions and other information
Sixth Circuit
Post-Booker/Fanfan Decisions
- Trammel, 6th Cir. 4/8/05 (remand where def. raised Booker claim first at oral
argument, discretion to correct plain error affecting important rights even when not raised on appeal)
- Johnson, 6th Cir. 4/15/05 (discussing w/o deciding std. of review for
revocation - formerly "plainly unreasonable" vs. now "unreasonable")
- Hamm, 6th Cir. 3/8/05 (error in sentencing under mandatory guidelines even though
court had denied downward departure in child sex case)
- McCravan, 6th Cir. 3/17/05 (no 6th Amend. error for 2 level increase for gun bump but
remand for court to take opportunity to consider under advisory scheme)
- Bradley, 6th Cir. 3/10/05 (noting that just because no tenable constitutional claim does
not preclude good statutory claim, but waived appeal in plea agreement)
- MacKinnon, 6th Cir. 3/9/05 (harmless
error review where def. objected to gun enhancement, plain error as to unobjected drug quantity)
- McGilvery, 6th Cir. 4/5/05 (def. waived appeal, court encouraged gov.
in future to promptly file motion to dismiss and include appellate waiver and plea colloquy)
- Jackson, 6th Cir. 3/24/05 (substantial rights affected, dist. court stated Guidelines a failure and could not
depart even if wanted to)
- Chriswell, 6th Cir. 3/18/05 (since court still required to consider
advisory guidelines, construction and interpretation reviewed de novo)
- Stonefish, 6th Cir. 3/30/05 (consideration of sentence in light of Booker
moot since def. released)
- Forrest, 6th Cir. 3/30/05 (gov. appeal of downward departure, remanded, court misapplied
departure provisions, prosecution by both state and fed. gov. permissable)
- Webb, 6th Cir. 4/6/05 (declined to rigidly define reasonableness, to address whether court
must calculate guidelines accurately and to hold whether sentence in advisory range per se reasonable; def. did not waive appeal right)
- Humphress, 6th Cir. 2/25/05 (Booker not retroactive, Summerlin applies
with equal force to Booker)
- Hazelwood, 6th Cir. 2/23/05 (rev. and remanded, considered whether improper
application of guidelines harmless error but still sentenced under mandatory scheme)
- Gonzalez, unpub. 6th Cir. 2/22/05 (career offender, no 6th Amend. error
using prior convictions, but remanded since now advisory guidelines)
- Jones, 6th Cir. 3/3/05 (on remand encouraged sentencing judge to explicitly state
reasons for applying particular guideline and sentencing within/without advisory range)
- Davis, 6th Cir. unpub. 1/21/05
(remanded, sentencing pre-Blakely and loss objected to on other than 6th Amend. grounds)
- Dottery, E.D. Mich 1/24/05 (dismissing superseding indictment
with sentencing factors and proceeding to trail on original indictment)
- Bruce, 6th Cir. 2/3/05 (6th Amend.
error for obst. of justice finding but no remand since def. did not contest factual basis and sentenced to high-end)
- Oliver, 6th Cir. 2/2/05 (28(j) letter and at oral argument
sufficient to raise Blakely/3C1.1 obstr. of justice enhancement, remand for dist. ct. to exercise discretion)
- Tuttamore, N.D. Ohio 1/1/05 (2255, noting Booker is not
retroactive and citing similar opinions)
- Harris, 6th Cir. 2/8/05 (vacated 924(c) penalty for judge
found firearm-type fact resulting in higher mandatory minimum, distinguishes from Sup. Ct.'s decisions in Castillo and Harris)
- Hines, unpub. 6th Cir. 2/7/05 (found that Blakely issue raised by
supplemental briefing after Blakely)
- Davis, 6th Cir. 1/21/05 (remanded, sentencing pre-Blakely and
loss objected to on other than 6th Amend. grounds)
- Rohira, N.D.Ohio 2/4/05 (grant motion for new trial, jury not
charged with finding loss, gov. agent's unreliable testimony about loss may have tainted jury's deliberation)
- Murdock, 6th Cir. 2/15/05 (no 6th Amend. error since def.
admitted fraud amount and did not contend that mandatory guidelines created
error)
- Barnett, 6th Cir. 2/16/05 (rejecting argument that jury not judge
required to determine nature of priors)
- Williams, N.D.Ohio 2/4/05 (grant of new trial motion, jury not
charged with finding loss amount, gov. agent's unreliable loss estimate may have tainted jury)
- McDaniel, 2/17/05 (remand under plain error review, sentenced and briefed before
both Blakely and Booker, waiver and forfeiture of these rights discussed)
- Kuhn, E.D.Mich. 1/12/05 (After government won downward departure appeal,
district court imposed the same sentence on remand.)
Post-Blakely, Pre-Booker/Fanfan Decisions
|
|