Criminal Law

Plaintiff pleaded guilty to three federal criminal violations: attempted Hobbs Act robbery, using, carrying, or brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, and being a felon in possession of a firearm. Plaintiff collaterally attacked his 25-year prison sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that it was invalid because the district court incorrectly used his attempted Hobbs Act robbery as a predicate crime of violence. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, explaining that was the appropriate outcome where plaintiff had admitted the facts to support his conviction as they were alleged in the indictment. (ST. EVE and MALDONADO, concurring)

Defendant pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm as a convicted felon and was sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act and defendant appealed. While on appeal, the supreme court held that a jury must make the different-occasions determination that is a prerequisite to sentencing under the Act and that the jury must make the finding unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt. Defendant argued that plain error occurred because in his case the judge and not the jury made the determination by a preponderance of the evidence. The Seventh Circuit agreed, vacated defendant’s sentence, and remanded for resentencing. (JACKSON-AKIWUMI, concurring and KIRSCH, specially concurring)

Defendant was found guilty of twelve count of theft of government property after he took blank Covid-19 vaccination cards from his workplace and sold them on the internet for his own personal benefit. On appeal, he argued that the government did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that the vaccination cards were government property since he took them from his employer, which had received them from the government, and not directly from the government. He also challenged the trial judge’s response to a jury question about the definition of government property. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could conclude that the government maintained sufficient supervision and control over the vaccination cards and that the trial court did not err in answering the jury’s question. (RIPPLE and KIRSCH, concurring)

Defendant pleaded guilty to reentering the United States in violation of federal law and was sentenced to an above-guidelines sentence of 48 months in prison. On appeal, defendant challenged the sentenced as substantively unreasonable. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that the district court acted well within its discretion in imposing the sentence where it concluded that a within-guidelines sentence was not sufficient based on defendant's having committed the same offense four prior times. (EASTERBROOK and KIRSCH, concurring)

Defendants were found guilty of federal mail fraud and money laundering charges resulting from a failed development project in which defendants were accused of diverting project revenue for personal gain. Defendants raised a wide range of issues on appeal. The Seventh Circuit found no merit in their arguments and affirmed, finding that defendants’ arguments either lacked merit or were waived. The appellate court also noted that the defendants’ briefs were deficient and ordered counsel to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned due to violations of Circuit Rule 30. (EASTERBROOK and BRENNAN, concurring)