tcdla - Voice For The Defense Online

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TCDLA Member Benefit Let them know you stand with the best: The TCDLA logo is now available for use on your website or on your business cards. TCDLA will create camera-ready artwork for business cards. Email mrendon@tcdla.com for more information. Advertisement
Buck Files On March 28, 2012, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the conviction of Marvin Peugh and the 70-month sentence imposed by United States District Judge Fredrick Kapala of the Northern District of Illinois. The Court held that using the United States Sentencing Guidelines in effect at time of sentencing, rather than at the time of the offense, did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. (Emphasis added.) United States v. Peugh 675 F.3d 736 (7th Cir. 2012) [Panel: Circuit Judges Rovener, Wood, and Williams]. Peugh had been indicted for two bank-fraud schemes in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344. The offense conduct occurred from January 1999 to August 2000. Judge Rovener’s opinion contains, in part, the following: Federal Corner At sentencing Peugh raised a number of objections to the presentence report. He first argued that sentencing him under the 2009 guidelines (then in effect) rather than under the 1999 guidelines (in effect at the time he committed his offenses) would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause because it would result in a significantly higher sentencing range. The court rejected this argument based on United States v. Demaree, 459 F.3d 791, 795 (7th Cir.2006), in which we held that using the guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing rather than the time of the offense does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause because the guidelines are merely advisory. *** Peugh renews his argument that the district court violated the Ex Post Facto Clause by calculating his sentence under the 2009 rather than the 1999 guidelines, which were in effect at the time he committed his offenses. Under the 2009 guidelines, Peugh’s advisory range jumped by more than 20 months. Peugh acknowledges that our holding in United States v. Demaree, 459 F.3d 791, 795 (7th Cir.2006), undercuts his position, but he urges us to reconsider that case and overrule it. We, however, stand by Demaree’s reasoning—the advisory nature of the guidelines vitiates any Ex Post Facto problem—and again decline the invitation to overrule it. Peugh’s lawyer didn’t just hang it up and say to his client, “At least we tried.” No, he filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted on November 9, 2012.
Page 1 and 2: FOR THE DEFENSE Volume 41 No. 10 |
Page 3 and 4: EDITOR Greg Westfall Fort Worth, Te
Page 5 and 6: 4 CLE and Events 4 January 2013 Ja
Page 7 and 8: Lydia Clay-Jackson You Just Have to
Page 9 and 10: Joseph A. Martinez TCDLA thanks the
Page 11 and 12: Robert Pelton We were all down at M
Page 13: CAUSE NO. 1234567 THE STATE OF TEXA
Page 17 and 18: court chose to impose the lowest se
Page 19 and 20: Bar # ____________________________
Page 21 and 22: he notes, the Jury went with a theo
Page 23 and 24: jury instructions would be useful t
Page 25 and 26: Rev. 137 (1965). This lack of compr
Page 27 and 28: find them, whether you agree with t
Page 29 and 30: “Every truly successful song expr
Page 31 and 32: of longing and regret wind their wa
Page 33 and 34: only their testimony but also any
Page 35 and 36: or even genuine or mistaken beliefs
Page 37 and 38: syndrome; 33 (3) the effect of hypn
Page 39 and 40: the jury, that the statement is rel
Page 41 and 42: Significant Decisions Report Please
Page 43 and 44: assistance, D’s guilty pleas were
Page 45 and 46: officer’s testimony—reversed by
Page 47 and 48: Registration Greg Westfall John Ack

tcdla - Voice For The Defense Online

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?