US v. Sherifi: In 2011, Sherifi was convicted on five counts related to terrorism activities, including a plot to attack the US Marine base at Quantico, Virginia. Two of those counts were convictions for possession of firearms in connection with a crime of violence, under 18 U.S.C. §924(c). He was convicted on all five counts and sentenced to a total of 540 months in prison. After the Supreme Court’s decision in Davis, however, Sherifi filed a §2255 motion arguing that his two §924(c) convictions were no longer valid. The district court agreed, vacated those counts, and scheduled a full resentencing. The district court eventually imposed a new sentence of 516 months in prison.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed Sherifi’s sentence. The court rejected Sherifi’s argument that his sentence was procedurally unreasonable because the district court failed to engage with his argument that the terrorism enhancement under the Guidelines overwhelmed his personal history and characteristics. To the contrary, the court held that the district court did consider Sherifi’s history and that was part of the basis for its decision to impose a downward variance from a Guideline sentence of life (Sherifi was already doing a life sentence imposed following a conviction for conspiring to kill witnesses who testified against him in this trial). The court did find error in the sentence on one count, where the jury did not make a finding of whether the object of the conspiracy was to murder, kidnap, or maim persons, which impacts the statutory maximum. However, under plain error review, Sherifi could not show prejudice (due to valid sentences on other counts) or that his sentence undermined the integrity of the criminal justice system.
No comments:
Post a Comment