Case o' The Week: Ninth Chokes on Strangling Challenge - Harrington and Double Counting in Assault Guideline
Convicted
for strangling, higher guideline for strangling -- and double-counting challenge
strangled, too.
Players:
Decision by Judge W. Fletcher, joined by Judges Callahan and Christen.
Hard-fought appeal by AFD Jeremy Sporn, Federal Defenders of Eastern Washington
and Idaho, Inc.
Facts:
Harrington strangled his spouse in Indian Country, and pleaded guilty to
assault in violation of 18 USC § 113(a)(8).
Id. at *1. (This statute criminalizes strangling a spouse within
specified jurisdictions). At sentencing, the government sought three additional
levels under USSG § 2A2.2(b)(4), because the offense involved strangling a
spouse. Id. Over defense objection the court imposed the enhancement.
Issue(s): “Harrington
contends that the district court impermissibly double counted when it applied a
three-level enhancement for strangling a spouse under § 2A2.2(b)(4) of the U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines (“Guidelines”). He contends that because his conviction
was for strangling a spouse, that conduct was already accounted for in the base
offense level of § 2A2.2(a).” Id.
Held: “We affirm the district court.” Id. at *1. “Harrington
contends that the district court erred in applying the three-level adjustment
for strangling a spouse in subsection (b)(4), on the ground that the base offense
level in subsection (a) has already taken that conduct into account. We
disagree. A plain-text reading of the Guideline indicates that the base offense
level contemplated by § 2A2.2(a) does not necessarily capture the conduct
detailed in the ‘specific offense characteristics.’” Id. at
*3.
Of Note: The acid test for double-counting is whether it is possible
to come within the guideline enhancement, without that conduct having
been an element for the offense of conviction. See id. at *3 (quoting United
States v. Reese, 2 F.3d 870 (9th Cir. 1993)). Here, “strangling” was an
element of the federal offense. It was also one (of several) triggers for the specific
offense enhancement.
Judge Fletcher explains, however, that it is possible to trigger
this particular base offense level enhancement without a victim being strangled.
Id. at *3. Because the conduct tied to the element of conviction –
strangling – was not necessarily required for this guideline enhancement,
the Ninth finds no double counting.
Disappointing result, but the Ninth’s old Reese
test ultimately controls the double counting analysis.
How to Use:
In Harrington, there was a good-faith legal dispute over a particular
guideline enhancement. Notably, the USAO for the ED of Washington was not afraid
to defend its legal position in the Ninth. The government allowed Mr.
Harrington to enter a conditional plea, and take up a sentence imposed that was
over 78 months. See id. at *2. Harrington is a good reminder that
a conditional plea needn’t be an all-or-nothing proposition: they aren’t just to
preserve appeals for suppression motions. Give Harrington to your local AFPD:
other USAO’s should emulate ED WA’s admirable courage in allowing all types of conditional
plea agreements.
For Further Reading: What a three days, in San Francisco.
District Attorney Chesa Boudin |
The day after Mr. Boudin swore in, US Attorney David
Anderson promptly held a press conference and announced federal capital charges for alleged
gang members. See article here.
The Hon. US Attorney David Anderson |
If you’re interested in Federalism, the proper relative roles
of federal and city governments in local crime enforcement, and the power struggles
over policy decision-making on criminal law issues, spend three days in
the City by the Bay.
Image
of the 2018 Federal Sentencing Guidelines from https://twitter.com/TheUSSCgov/status/1057716005361905665
Image
of District Attorney Chesa Boudin from https://www.kqed.org/news/11793457/can-s-f-s-chesa-boudin-flip-the-script-for-progressive-das-across-the-country
Steven
Kalar, Federal Public Defender N.D. Cal. Website at www.ndcalfpd.org
.
Labels: Conditional Pleas, Federalism, Guideline Double-Counting, Section 2A2.2(b)(4), Sentencing, W. Fletcher
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home