DOJ Does Its Best To Water Down First Step, but Courts Are
Granting Relief
by Derek Gilna
This past
week we have fielded many questions regarding questionable institutional
implementation of First Step (FSA), which confirms that DOJ is either
intentionally or negligently misinterpreting key elements of FSA. Fortunately,
in instances where FSA matters have come before them, judges have generally declined
to rule in favor of DOJ. The shifting
national political calculus stemming from the booming national economy and the
shortage of workers is also rendering DOJ's dark worldview almost irrelevant,
since businesses and the current Administration are increasingly prisoner
friendly. Business knows the economy falters without workers.
One area
where DOJ is misinterpreting the law is 841(B)(1)(A), and(B)(1)((B), and
(B)(1)(C), but in determining eligibility for relief, DOJ left off "death
or serious bodily injury." If you
are a victim of this error, start the remedy process as soon as possible to set
the stage for possible sentence relief.
DOJ
lawyers, fresh from the Inspector General's (IG) rebuke of its domestic spying,
and investigatorial misconduct for shoddy investigative techniques in Foreign
Intelligence court warrants (FISA) , face yet another scandal. DOJ has been
accused by the IG of improperly using
requests for overseas evidence to extend the 5-year statue of limitations in
fraud cases. See US
In US PSA misrepresented
that it was analogous to methylenedioxy-meth (MDMA) constituted ineffective
assistance. Vacated and remanded. US v.
Sepling, 944 F. 3d 138, (3d Cir. 2019).
In US v
Woods, 19-5685, the 6th Circuit, in a First Step appeal, the defender, although
not granted sentence relief, was found ELIGIBLE for relief, but the violent
nature of his offense justified the court, in exercising its sound discretion,
from granting it. Although Woods lost
his case, we gained a valuable precedent applicable in the right factual
circumstances, and with a well-drawn petition.
Two major
cases further the argument that Hobbs Act Robbery is not a crime of violence
for 924(c) purposes. We have previously reported on US U.S. 1-8-20 ), the court dismissed a Conspiracy to Commit
Hobbs Act Robbery and Attempted HAR count,
also finding that it was NOT a crime of violence.
As always,
we stand ready to review your factual circumstances for 2255 habeas relief,
alleging inadequate representation of counsel in the district court. Let not
your heart be troubled.
Federal Legal Center, Inc., Derek A. Gilna, JD, Director
(Also in Indiana dgilna1948@yahoo.co
