Criminal Law

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 36-month term of incarceration in prosecution on charge that defendant aided and assisted taxpayers in preparing tax returns that contained materially false and fraudulent information, where Dist. Ct. based sentence in part on calculation of tax loss at "between $400,000 to $1 million" arising out of 662 similar tax returns prepared by defendant. Record contained evidence suggesting clear pattern that taxpayers expected to owe taxes when submitting tax records to defendant for preparation of tax return, but received tax refunds generated from defendant's inclusion of false information not submitted by taxpayers. Gov't. was not required during sentencing proceeding to present evidence from each taxpayer attesting to fact that they were unaware of fraudulent information supplied by defendant. Moreover, Dist. Ct. was not required to give more precise tax loss figure.

Dist. Ct. did not err in imposing mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years under Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) on charge of possession of firearm by felon, even though three prior felonies used to support instant sentence occurred more than 35 years prior to instant offense. Ct. rejected defendant's arguments that imposition of instant mandatory minimum sentence violated separation of powers doctrine, his 5th Amendment due process rights, his 6th Amendment right to jury trial and 8th Amendment where defendant presented evidence demonstrating rehabilitation since date of prior convictions. Fact that instant prior convictions involving separate armed robberies occurred within 6-day window did not require different result.

Record failed to contain sufficient evidence to support defendant’s conviction under 8 USC section 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) for harboring or shielding from detection unlawful alien under facts indicating that defendant, who was girlfriend of alien, lived with alien in her home for period of three years after he had returned to U.S. without authorization. Ct. found that defendant’s cohabiting with alien-boyfriend did not fit definition of “harboring” as that term is contemplated in section 1326(a)(1)(A)(iii), even if defendant was aware of alien illegal status, where record failed to show that defendant conducted clandestine sheltering of alien or otherwise shielded alien from observation or discovery by others. (Dissent filed.)

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying his habeas petition alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective in defending him on attempted murder charges by pursuing false alibi defense where counsel had no witnesses to support said defense and had failed to provide govt. with required notice of said defense and further failed to present appropriate jury instruction regarding said defense. State court’s denial of similar claim on merits was entitled to deference, and trial counsel’s decision to pursue alibi defense was reasonable where: (1) defendant had refused to take witness stand to establish more viable defense, i.e., lack of intent to commit crime; (2) defendant had requested that counsel take “all or nothing” approach in defense; and (3) trial counsel actively pursued alternative argument that victim misidentified defendant. Fact that trial counsel made decision to lie about defendant’s whereabouts does not require different result since rule against presenting false testimony is geared to protect integrity of truth-finding function of courts and was not meant to protect rights owed to defendant.