US v. Freeman: As set out in more detail here, Freeman was sentenced to 210 months in prison after pleading guilty to possession with intent to distribute prescription painkillers. At sentencing, her attorney made some ill-advised decisions regarding Guideline objects in a fruitless pursuit to get Freeman into a diversionary program. A panel of the Fourth Circuit vacated the sentence on two grounds: (1) that Freeman's counsel had been ineffective and clearly so based on the record as it existed, given that it included counsel's reasoning for the decisions he made; and (2) that the sentence was substantively unreasonable.
The Government sought and received an en banc rehearing, with the same ultimate result on somewhat narrower grounds, with a 8-5 vote. The same judges from the panel wrote the opinions - Chief Judge Gregory for the majority, Judge Quattlebaum for the dissent. The en banc court again concluded that Freeman's trial counsel had been ineffective, but did not reach the issue of whether the sentence was ultimately substantively unreasonable. The dissent again argued that the record was not sufficient to determine ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal (as it almost never is).
No comments:
Post a Comment