Eleveth Circuit republishes "Catch-22"

United States v. Willis

Let's see if I can summarize this 22-page opinion that details why the defendant didn't raise anything for appeal...

Defendant sentenced as a career offender and receives firearm enhancement.  Defendant receives an 18% reduction under 5k for cooperation.  Defendant appealed the sentence in light of the firearm enhancement - he looses.

Defendant files 2255 motion alleging that his counsel was ineffective for failing to raise various objections, including to the firearm enhancement, drug quantity and career offender recommendations of the first PSR.  Government concedes on career offender and judge orders that:

"Movant Charles Willis is entitled to be resentenced absent the career offender enhancement applied at his initial sentencing.  Accordingly, the United States Probation Office is DIRECTED to prepare a new presentence investigation report reflecting the fact that Willis is not a career offender under the sentencing
guidelines."

PSR comes back and judge orders sentencing for next day.

Judge does not hear any objections to anything during sentencing hearing.  Judge sentences Willis to bottom of the guidelines and then denies government's motion for 5k.

Appeal follows.

Court finds that Willis has waived everything except his objection to the one-day turnaround from PSR to sentencing (which is now viewed under a harmless error analysis thanks to the opinion) and his objection to the denial of the 5k.

Now this is the great part.  The Court reasons that all the other issues that Willis tried to raise during his re-sentencing but that the district court refused to hear because those issues had been dealt with in the original sentencing hearing (including the firearm enhancement and drug quantity), and in Willis's 2255 (which had been denied on those issues), were not before the district court on the second sentencing.

BUT - for some reason, the district judge had discretion to deny the 5k motion the second time around when it had ruled the first time Willis was entitled to the reduction and gave him an 18% cut.

And to make it even better, the appellate court finds that Willis raised the 2255 issues which the district court refused to hear because he did not ask the appellate court for a certificate of eligibility on them!

Now - to save time, I am writing on behalf of my favorite poster: "This Blog Sucks!"  Also, I have finally figured out why he is so angry - the attached clip explains it all - now go kick your dog.