US v. Vick: Vick was in federal custody at a local jail in which he was “running” his pod, brining in contraband with the assistance of paid-off correctional officers. During an investigation of his scheme, his cell was searched and Vick attacked an officer when he “attempted to move Vick from his cell.” Vick “lifted him up off the ground, throwing him against the nearby wall, slamming him to the concrete floor,” although the officer suffered no “lasting injury that required medical treatment.” Vick pleaded guilty to bribery and conspiracy charges. At sentencing, the district court imposed a six-level enhancement because Vick’s assault created a “substantial risk of serious injury” and imposed a sentence in the middle of the resulting Guideline range.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed Vick’s sentence. Vick’s primary argument was that the district court applied the wrong legal standard in imposing the enhancement, arguing that while the Guideline itself required only “assault,” the commentary required “aggravated assault” that should be defined based on the Guideline for that offense. The court disagreed, holding that the commentary narrowed the type of assault which was required, requiring that it be “tantamount” to aggravated assault. The court also rejected Vick’s argument that, even by the district court’s standard, his conduct didn’t support the enhancement (the event was on video). The court also held that the district court sufficiently explained its sentence and that the sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
No comments:
Post a Comment