U. S. Supreme Court Happenings and Favorable Federal Circuit Opinions and-- for the Week of March 3-7, 2025--

U. S. Supreme Court Happenings– Week Ending March 7, 2025 –

On Monday, the U. S. Supreme Court released its new order list and granted certiorari in one criminal/sentencing case. The petitioner via this cert petition in Barrett v. United States, (No. 24-5774), presented two questions to the Justices, but just grant of review was limited to just this first question:

Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause permits two sentences for an act that violates 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and § 924(j), a question that divides seven circuits but about which the Solicitor General and Petitioner agree.

Notably, the cert petition was filed back in November 2024 before the change in administrations, so it is possible that new people in the Office of the Solicitor General may not longer agree with the petitioner about how this question should be answered.

Favorable Federal Circuit Opinions for the Week of March 3-7, 2025 –

5th Circuit

United States v. Cisneros, (No. 23-40625)(5th Cir. March 6, 2025)– Cisneros appeals his conviction and sentence for possessing ammunition after having been convicted of a felony. With respect to his sentence, Cisneros argued that the district court plainly erred by applying an enhancement under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possessing ammunition in connection with another felony offense. For § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) to apply, the “the firearm or ammunition [must have] facilitated, or had the potential of facilitating, another felony offense.” Id. § 2K2.1 cmt. n.14(A). Relying on United States v. Eaden, 914 F.3d 1004 (5th Cir. 2019), Cisneros argues that this “conclusive presumption” of facilitation based on proximity does not apply where, as here, the defendant is found in possession of ammunition but no firearm. Cisneros contends that the district court’s application of § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) was therefore error because the record is devoid of evidence that Cisneros’s possession of the ammunition found in his bedroom facilitated or had the potential to facilitate felony drug crimes. Based on Eaden’s holding and the undisputed facts before us, Cisneros has shown sentencing error. The district court’s plain error also affected Cisneros’s substantial rights because he has shown a reasonable probability that but for the error, he would have received a lesser sentence. The Court vacated his sentence, and remanded for resentencing not inconsistent with this opinion.

6th Circuit

United States v. Cogdill, (No. 22-5603)(6th Cir. March 3, 2025)– This case returns to us after the Supreme Court vacated our earlier decision and remanded for our reconsideration following Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024). After defendant Calvin Cogdill pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, the district court, over Cogdill’s objection, determined that Cogdill committed three prior drug offenses “on occasions different from one another,” subjecting him to an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Erlinger later clarified that it was error for the judge, instead of a jury, to make that occasions decision. Here, the Court had to review that error for harmlessness, see United States v. Campbell, 122 F.4th 624, 629–31 (6th Cir. 2024), and the Court held that the district court’s error was not harmless, and therefore, vacated Cogdill’s sentence and remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

United States v. Erker, (No. 23-3109)(6th Cir. March 3, 2025)– Raymond Erker operated a Ponzi scheme that swindled over fifty people, mainly senior citizens, out of nine million dollars. A jury convicted Erker of mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, and making a false statement under oath. Erker appealed his money laundering conviction and various aspects of his sentence. The Court remanded so that the district court can consider his eligibility for a sentence reduction under Amendment 821.

COMMENT:

Based on the recent executive order of President Trump, Alert2020 believes that anyone who was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and has a non-drug and non-violent predicate prior conviction should opt to have us look at their case to see if they may be able to challenge their § 922(g) conviction.

In light of the recent En Banc Third Circuit decisions in Range and Daniels, and the recent decisions in Sixth, Eighth and Ninth Circuit, we suggest that anyone with a non-violent non-drug conviction where they were charged under § 922(g) should opt for the quick lookup we are extending this offer through February of 2025. In addition, the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits have determined that district courts may consider § 403(a)’s non-retroactive changes in combination with other factors presented by an incarcerated person. These Circuits effectively allow district courts to consider an incarcerated person’s stacked charges as an extraordinary and compelling reason, so long as they present another factor that may warrant compassionate release. In order to conduct the lookup, we will need an outside contact’s name and telephone number, where you went to court, and your case number. We will get in touch with your contact and let them know if you have any potential relief available from the above remedies. Our case evaluation telephone number for the above is (832) 346-0220.

For the last 30 years, we have been very successful on direct appeals, 2255 motions, 2241 Petitions, First Step Act and Compassionate Release Motions, Earned Time Credits, DC Superior Court Petitions, State Post Conviction, Clemencies and Pardons and other specialized motions to mention a few avenues for relief we cover. The WCE is an excellent low-cost tool to see what can be done for you at any stage of the proceedings. It is thorough and detailed from day one of your case to present with our recommendations of any remedies available to you to gain relief.

If you are serious about fighting your case and want us to evaluate your case to see if you may have relief coming, request a Written Case Evaluation.