For your reading pleasure, here are more summary orders of interest:
In two related decisions, both captioned United States v. Salvagno, Nos. 06-4201-cr and 06-4202-cr (2d Cir. August 28, 2009), the defendants, who were father and son, complained of a confict of interest between some of their attorneys – they were employed at the same firm – at sentencing. The circuit concluded that the district court’s Curcio hearing, while “not examplary” was adequate because the conflict was waived by each defendant’s non-conflicted attorney, with the defendants present and “evidently in agreement.”
In United States v. Rodriguez-Nieves, No. 08-0783-cr (2d Cir. August 28, 2009), the court agreed that, where the the defendant was convicted of being the principal administrator of a continuing criminal enterprise (“CCE”) under 21 U.S.C. § 848, his convictions of two lesser included offenses – an underlying drug conspiracy count and a conviction for basic administration of the same CCE – were unauthorized.
In United States v. Peguero, No. 07-2306-cr (2d Cir. August 19, 2009), the court vacated a sentence where the district court presumed that the guideline sentence was reasonable by saying, “I have the ability to do justice and depart [or impose] a sentence independently of the Guidelines, but my opinion is that that is reserved for really special situations, and I even then take the Guidelines into serious consideration.”
Comments are closed.