Friday, February 18, 2005

Ameline Update

The government has filed a motion to defer disposition of all pending direct criminal appeals presenting Booker claims pending resolution of the government's petition for rehearing en banc; to expedite consideration of the decision whether to rehear this case en banc; and, if the petition is granted, for expedited oral argument (available here) and a petition for rehearing en banc (available here).


Blogger chipesq said...

Ninth Circuit throws out another sentence in light of Booker!
The Ninth has done it again, in this case from Feb. 18th, United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, the Ninth stated that a district court must reconsider its decision to depart 16 levels upward and impose a sentence enhancement upon an offender for a prior crime under Oregon law.

For full opinion, see below:

This opinion is important because it suggests nearly all federal prisoners in the West will be entitled to a re-sentencing or at least to ask the judge not to impose very severe enhancements. In this case, the Court held that the defendant's enhancement CAN be imposed (that is what the Court says), but it does not HAVE to be imposed (after Booker) and therefore the defendant is entitled to a re-sentencing and to argue that it SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED. You can see, good defense counsel make all the difference in these matters. If you can get you re-sentencing (which seems easier and easier), you still need good counsel to craft an argument to reduce your sentence. At our firm, we have compiled a Motions bank of nearly 200 factors or reasons to mitigate or lower a federal prisoner's sentence. Please call us or email us today for more information.

Chip Venie, Esq.
(619) 235-8300

Sunday, February 20, 2005 7:44:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home