Criminal Law

Plaintiff was found guilty of multiple charges of tax fraud. Subsequently, his trial counsel was removed from the federal bar for attorney misconduct in an unrelated case. Plaintiff challenged his sentence, arguing that his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel, based in part on the attorney’s disciplinary proceedings. The district court denied relief and plaintiff appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that any errors made by trial counsel did not prejudice plaintiff’s trial. (SCUDDER and ST. EVE, concurring)

Defendant was found guilty of robbery and of aiding and abetting the brandishing of a firearm. On appeal, defendant argued that there was not sufficient evidence to establish that he had advance knowledge that a rifle would be brandished by a confederate during the robbery. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that it could not conclude that the evidence of advance knowledge was “so tenuous” as to make defendant’s conviction shocking. (BRENNAN and ST. EVE, concurring)

After defendant violated numerous conditions of his supervised release, the district court sentenced him to 36 months in prison. On appeal, defendant argued that the district court erred by increasing the length of his sentence for the purpose of rehabilitation. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that the district court properly considered rehabilitation before revoking defendant’s supervision and imposing a sentence. (HAMILTON and KIRSCH, concurring)

Defendant was found guilty of selling cocaine to a government informant. On appeal, defendant argued that the evidence against him was insufficient, the prosecutor indirectly commented on his decision not to testify, and a juror improperly drew a negative inference from his silence. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that it could not conclude that no rational trier of fact would have found defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that any error regarding the rebuttal argument of the prosecution did not rise to plain error, and that defendant was not entitled to a new trial based a juror’s remark after trial. (JACKSON-AKIWUMI and MALDONADO, concurring)

Defendant pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. During sentencing, the government sought an enhancement for recklessly endangering others because he threw the gun over a fence into a backyard. The government also asked the district court to apply a higher base offense level based on the belief that defendant previously had used the firearm in furtherance of a murder. The district court agreed and sentenced defendant to the maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. On appeal, defendant argued that neither of the enhancements applied to him and that the sentence was substantively unreasonable. The Seventh Circuit rejected these arguments and affirmed. (KOLAR and MALDONADO, concurring)