ALERT UPDATE 2020 – WEEKLY REPORT U.S. Supreme Court and Circuit Court Wins
Edition: Week of July 7-11, 2025, 2025
SUPREME COURT WATCH
The Justices are currently on Summer recess until October, 2025.
CIRCUIT COURT VICTORIES: 1st, 2nd, 4th, 7th and 9th Circuits Deliver Big Wins–United States v. Ceballos, (No. 23-1610)(1st Cir. July 8, 2025)– the First Circuit vacated the 90-month sentence of Defendant-Appellant José
Miguel Guzmán-Ceballos, who had pleaded guilty to transporting 385 kilograms of cocaine from the Dominican Republic to Puerto Rico. Although Guzmán-Ceballos admitted guilt to all counts
without a plea agreement, he sought a mitigating role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. The district court denied the adjustment, but failed to conduct the required four-step analysis.
On appeal, the First Circuit agreed that the sentencing court committed procedural error. Specifically, the court failed to (1) define the universe of participants involved in the offense,
(2) place those participants along a spectrum of culpability, (3) identify the average participant in the scheme, and (4) compare Guzmán-Ceballos’s role to that of the average participant
while applying the § 3B1.2 factors. Because of this failure to properly analyze the mitigating role claim, the First Circuit vacated the sentence and remanded the case for resentencing in
accordance with the Guidelines.
United States v. Mackey, (No. 23-7577)(2d Cir. July 8, 2025)– Defendant-Appellant Douglass Mackey appealed his conviction from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Judge Donnelly), where he was found guilty under 18 U.S.C. § 241 for conspiring to deprive individuals of their right to vote. The conviction stemmed from memes Mackey posted or reposted on Twitter in the days leading up to the 2016 presidential election, which falsely claimed that Hillary Clinton supporters could vote via text message. On appeal, Mackey challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, arguing that the government failed to prove he knowingly entered into a conspiracy to interfere with voting rights. The Second Circuit agreed, finding that the evidence did not establish that Mackey had the requisite intent to join the charged conspiracy. Accordingly, the Court reversed Mackey’s conviction and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal.
United States v. Simmons, (No. 23-4607)(4th Cir. July 7, 2025)– Stephen Simmons pled guilty to possessing an unregistered “auto sear,” a device that converts semi-automatic firearms into machineguns, in violation of the National Firearms Act. On the day of the offense, he tested positive for methamphetamine and marijuana. The Court agreed that the district court improperly applied enhancements related to firearms not covered by the National Firearms Act, as they were unrelated to his conviction and he was sentenced under an improper Sentencing Guidelines range. The Court vacated Simmons’s sentence and remanded for resentencing.
United States v. Mosby, (No. 24-4304)(4th Cir. July 11, 2025)--Marilyn Mosby, former Baltimore City State’s Attorney, was convicted of perjury and mortgage fraud in separate jury trials. On appeal, she raised multiple challenges to both convictions. Mosby contended that the district court issued a flawed venue instruction, that the evidence was insufficient to support venue, and that improper cross-examination referencing her perjury conviction prejudiced the jury. The Fourth Circuit agreed that the district court erred in instructing the jury on venue and vacated the mortgage fraud conviction on that basis—without addressing her other arguments. Because the district court’s forfeiture order was predicated on the now-vacated mortgage fraud conviction, the forfeiture ruling was also vacated.
Larry v. United States, (No. 23-2957)(7th Cir. July 7, 2025)–Michael Lairy filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that he was improperly sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), which imposes a mandatory 15-year sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). He also claimed ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to challenge his ACCA status. The government did not address the substance of Lairy’s claims, instead asserting that his petition was untimely. The district court agreed and denied relief. The Seventh Circuit held that the court abused its discretion by denying equitable tolling without first holding an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, the Court vacated the denial of the § 2255 petition and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether equitable tolling should apply.
United States v. Liberado, (23-3262)(9th Cir. July 8, 2025)–The panel reversed Wardy Alfonso Liberato’s conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) for unlawful reentry after removal and remanded the case with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal. The sole issue on appeal was whether the government presented sufficient evidence to prove that Liberato was "free from official restraint" at any point before his apprehension—an essential element for conviction under § 1326. To satisfy this burden, the government had to show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Liberato was unmonitored and unrestrained while present in the United States. The panel held that the evidence at trial failed to meet this standard. There was no testimony establishing Liberato’s location or conduct when first seen, and the only evidence placed him near the border fence with no indication he had moved beyond the area or evaded surveillance. As a result, the court concluded that no rational jury could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Liberato was ever free from official restraint.
WRITTEN CASE EVALUATIONS (“WCE”)30 Years. Thousands Helped. Real Results.
We offer professional, affordable evaluations for:
- Direct appeals
- § 2255 / § 2241 motions
- First Step Act + Compassionate Release
- Earned time credit disputes
- Clemency + pardon requests
- Specialized State and Federal post-conviction motions
- Case number
Please Provide:
- Contact’s name + telephone number
- Court of conviction
- Case number