Justia U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

The First Circuit summarily affirmed Appellant's sentence for possessing a firearm as a convicted felon, holding that the forty-eight-month sentence represented a defensible result.On appeal, Defendant argued that the upwardly variant sentence was substantively unreasonable because the district court imposed a sentence based on an incorrect statement of a material fact concerning Defendant's criminal history. The district court in this case, however, corrected its misstatement before imposing the sentence. The First Circuit summarily affirmed the sentence, holding that where the district court's brief mischaracterization of Defendant's prior offense was promptly corrected, the district court's sentencing rationale was plausible. View "United States v. Rodriguez-Cruz" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's conviction of Hobbs Act robbery, murdering a person through the use of firearm during a crime of violence, possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, and being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm, holding that there was no error in the proceedings below.Specifically, the First Circuit held (1) under the circumstances of this case, the district court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to suppress identification evidence; (2) the evidence was sufficient to support Defendant's convictions; and (3) the district court did not err in determining that Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a "crime of violence" under 18 U.S.C. 924(c). View "United States v. Seary-Colon" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the the district court's denial of Petitioner's petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence, holding that the district court did not err in denying the motion.Petitioner pled guilty to one count of possession of a firearm and entered into a plea agreement with the government that included a sixty-month sentencing recommendation. At sentencing, the district court imposed a 120-month sentence. The First Circuit affirmed. Thereafter, Petitioner filed this petition asserting ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court denied relief. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that Petitioner was not prejudiced by counsel's failure to object to the discrepancy between two versions of events contained in the presentence investigation report. View "Fernandez-Garay v. United States" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the sentences imposed on Defendant after he pleaded guilty to one count of illegally possessing a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), holding that the sentences were substantively and procedurally reasonable.The district court sentenced Defendant to a within-guidelines sentence of forty-six months' imprisonment for violating section 922(g)(1), to be served consecutively with a sentence of eighteen months for violating the terms of his supervised release. Defendant appealed, arguing that the sentences were procedurally and substantively unreasonable. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the sentences were both substantively and procedurally reasonable. View "United States v. Ayala-Lugo" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's conviction of conspiracy to commit various financial crimes, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and converting government property, holding that Defendant was not entitled to relief as to any of his assignments of error.This case arose from Defendant's participation, along with several coconspirators, in a scheme to defraud the federal government by falsifying tax returns. A jury convicted him of multiple counts, and the judge sentenced him to eighty-four months in jail. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) Defendant's claims of error in the trial judge's evidentiary rulings were unavailing; and (2) the judge properly applied two sentencing enhancements. View "United States v. Grullon" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court sentencing Defendant in connection with his plea of guilty to the federal crime of carjacking, 18 U.S.C. 2119, holding that the sentence was reasonable.Prior to Defendant's guilty plea he entered into a plea agreement with the government stipulating a total offense level (TOL) but not a criminal history category (CHC). At sentencing, the district court calculated a higher TOL than the one in the plea agreement. Together with the court's CHC calculation, the calculated TOL resulted in a higher sentencing range than that set out in the plea agreement. The First Circuit affirmed the sentence, holding (1) the district court committed no procedural errors during sentencing; and (2) Defendant's sentence was substantively reasonable. View "United States v. Pupo" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's sentence of 135 months' imprisonment imposed in connection with his plea of guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine on board a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and other drug-related crimes, holding that Defendant's sentence was not unreasonable.On appeal, Defendant argued that the district court procedurally erred by failing to apply an adjustment for his role in the offense and a departure based on his family responsibilities. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the district court (1) did not err in refusing to grant a reduction to Defendant's offense based on his allegedly minor role in the crime; and (2) did not err in refusing to grant a departure based on Defendant's family ties and responsibilities. View "United States v. Castillo-Vazquez" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court revoking Defendant's supervised release on the underlying conviction of failing to register as a sex offender, in violation of federal law, holding that Defendant's challenges on appeal were unavailing.In revoking Defendant's supervised release, the district court found that Defendant, upon his release from prison, once again failed to register as a sex offender, thus violating the conditions of his release, as well as state and federal law. On appeal, Defendant argued that the district court abused its discretion by not excusing his failure to register and that his sentence was unreasonable. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Defendant violated the terms of his supervised release; and (2) Defendant's sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable. View "United States v. Picard" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's sentence of sixty months imprisonment for being a felon in possession of a firearm, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Defendant.Defendant's Guidelines Sentencing Range was thirty-seven to forty-six months in prison. The district court, however, sentenced Defendant to sixty months. The First Circuit affirmed the sentence, holding (1) the district court did not base his sentence on unreliable information in the form of a description in the presentence report of a juvenile burglary conviction in Puerto Rico court; (2) the judge imposed a variance, rather than a departure; and (3) Defendant was not entitled to relief on his remaining claims of error. View "United States v. Ayala-Landor" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court sentencing Defendant to eighty-seven months for engaging in firearms trafficking without a license and conspiring to commit an offense against the United States, holding that the sentence was not unreasonable.Defendant's crimes violated the terms of two supervised release sentences, leading to the revocation of both and two consecutive sentences of imprisonment. For his crimes, Defendant was sentenced to eighty-seven months in prison, to be served consecutively to the revocation sentences. On appeal, Defendant argued that the district court erred by viewing the Sentencing Guidelines as mandatory. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that Defendant's claims on appeal were without merit. View "United States v. Zayas-Burgos" on Justia Law