Cases published since November 1987.
  • Contact Us
  • James Publishing
  • Login
Logo
Searching Tips

How To Search: Type words into the entry box that you want to search for, then click [Search].
Any Word: Just type one or more words to find any of the words. [ Find ANY ] is the usual default.
All Words: Type more than one word and select [ Find ALL ] to find all of the words.
Or you can use Booleans (see below).
Exact Phrase: “…”
You can search for exact phrases by surrounding them in double quotes. Or you can just type the words and select [ Find EXACT phrase ]. Punctuation must be the same to be found between words, for example “Smith, John”
Boolean Operators: + –
Use + in front of each word or a quoted phrase that you require.
Use – in front of each word that you want to exclude.
Boolean Expressions: AND OR NOT ( )
Use AND, OR, NOT, (, and ) to form a Boolean expression. AND requires, OR allows, NOT excludes.
Use double quotes to protect the words “and”, “or”, or “not” in a phrase.
Examples:

Query Gets the documents with
stock market ‘stock’ or ‘market’ or both
“stock market” the phrase ‘stock market’
+stock +market ‘stock’ and ‘market’
+stock -market ‘stock’ but not ‘market’
+president -“United States” ‘president’ but not ‘United States’
(stock OR market) AND NOT president ‘stock’ or ‘market’, and without ‘president’

Capitalization doesn’t matter. The ranked results will come from a total match on the words and phrases which you supply, so try to think of several specific terms for your topic and spell them correctly. It may help to include important plurals and derived words too, like [address addresses contact contacting information] .

Table of Contents

110 – Guidelines Sentencing, Generally

110 – Guidelines Sentencing, Generally
  • 115 Rule 35(a) or (c) Motion to Correct Sentence (for Rule 35(b), see §711)
  • 120 Constitutional Issues, Generally (including Apprendi)
  • 145 Statutory Challenges To Guidelines

Back to main table of contents

§132 Ex Post Facto: Continuing Offenses/Conspiracy

 
First Circuit
Second Circuit
Third Circuit
Fourth Circuit
Fifth Circuit
Sixth Circuit
Seventh Circuit
Eighth Circuit
Ninth Circuit
Tenth Circuit
Eleventh Circuit
D.C. Circuit

1st Circuit applies guidelines to defendant who did not withdraw from conspiracy be­fore Novem­ber 1, 1987. (132) Defendant argued that the guidelines did not apply to him because the principal evidence against him occurred before November 1, 1987, when the guidelines took effect.  The 1st Cir­cuit upheld the application of the guidelines for two reasons.  First, defendant waived this claim by failing to make it during the sen­tencing process.  Second, defendant was a member of an ongoing conspiracy that con­tinued past the effective date of the guidelines and he did not withdraw before the effective date.  U.S. v. Innamorati, 996 F.2d 456 (1st Cir. 1993).

 

1st Circuit finds no ex post facto problem where earlier embezzlements were “relevant conduct” for later ones. (132) From 1987 to 1991, defendant embezzled large sums of money from his employer.  During this period, section 2B1.1(b)(1) was amended to in­crease the base offense level.  The district court applied the amendment, even though some of the embezzlements oc­curred earlier.  The 1st Circuit affirmed, al­though it rejected the government’s con­tention that defendant commit­ted a continu­ing offense.  Defendant was formally sen­tenced for some offenses which were com­pleted before the guideline increase, but this did not preju­dice him, because under the “relevant con­duct” sec­tion of the guidelines, his sentences for the post-amendment con­duct would be based on the full amount em­bezzled.  Even if some of the sentences for the earlier embezzlements could not be sup­ported, this did not affect defen­dant since all of his sentences were to be served con­currently.  U.S. v. Regan, 989 F.2d 44 (1st Cir. 1993).

 

1st Circuit finds conspiracy ended before guide­lines took effect. (132) The district court found that the drug conspiracy ended in 1989, and sentenced defendant under the guidelines.  The 1st Circuit re­versed, holding that although defendant con­tinued to be in­volved in a drug conspiracy after November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines, this con­spiracy was different from the one with which defen­dant had been charged.  The court identified several factors to consider in decid­ing whether activity is part of separate conspiracies or a single conspiracy:  when the activity occurred, the location of the activ­ity, the identities of the per­sons involved, the co-con­spirators’ ends, the means used to achieve those ends, and the similarity in the evidence used to prove the activities.  The court noted that defendant’s post-guidelines activity was generally related to personal use, while the earlier ac­tivities were more profit-ori­ented.  Judge Campbell dissented. U.S. v. Cloutier, 966 F.2d 24 (1st Cir. 1992).

 

1st Circuit holds letters to conceal embez­zlement extended scheme past effective date of guidelines. (132) Defendant, in his capacity as guardian for a dis­abled veteran, embezzled Veterans’ Administration funds.  The 1st Circuit upheld the application of the guidelines to the offense, even though all of the acts of embezzlement occurred prior to November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  Defendant wrote letters to the Veterans Administration in 1988 which the dis­trict court concluded were an effort to conceal the embez­zlement.  Therefore, the embezzle­ment scheme con­tinued into 1988.  U.S. v. Young, 955 F.2d 99 (1st Cir. 1992).

 

2nd Circuit finds no requirement for jury to find conduct continued after guidelines’ effective date. (132) Defendant was convicted of RICO, CCE and drug conspiracy offenses and sentenced to a mandatory life term under the guidelines.  In a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, he argued that the district court erred in sentencing him under the guidelines because the jury made no specific finding that his conduct had continued beyond the effective date of the guidelines.  The 2nd Circuit upheld the denial of relief.  This claim had been rejected on direct appeal, and could not be relitigated.  Moreover, there is no requirement that the jury must find that the conduct occurred after the effective date of the guidelines be­fore a defendant can be sentenced under the guide­lines.  The case cited by defendant dealt with a sub­stantive criminal statute, rather than the guidelines.  A sentencing factor may be found by the sentencing court by a preponderance of the evidence.  Underwood v. U.S., 15 F.3d 16 (2nd Cir. 1993).

 

2nd Circuit holds that acts of concealment did not extend conspiracy beyond guide­lines’ effective date. (132) Defendant was convicted of conspiring to bribe a public offi­cial.  The 2nd Circuit affirmed that this was not a “straddle” conspiracy and defendant was properly sentenced under pre-guidelines law.  The conspiracy ended with the $30,000 payment to the public official.  The acts which occurred after November 1, 1987, the effec­tive date of the guide­lines, were merely acts to cover up the conspiracy and were not done in furtherance of the conspiracy.  U.S. v. Crozier, 987 F.2d 893 (2nd Cir. 1993).

 

2nd Circuit affirms that RICO conspir­acy extended beyond effective date of guide­lines. (132) Based on a fraudulent mailing on March 29, 1988, the 2nd Cir­cuit affirmed that the RICO conspiracy ex­tended beyond November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  The de­termination that the con­spiracy “straddled” the effective date of the guidelines was a sentencing factor to be deter­mined by the judge, not the jury.  One defendant’s claim that he held a minimal role in the conspiracy was ir­relevant to this issue.  The court rejected a second defendant’s claim that he should not be sentenced under the guidelines because he did nothing after November 1, 1987.  It was reasonably fore­seeable to him that the conspiracy would con­tinue.  The court also rejected claims that two defendants affirmatively withdrew from the conspiracy.  Although one left the firm in 1984, he continued for work on an ad hoc basis.  The other resigned his position to prac­tice with an inde­pendent firm, but con­tinued to be entitled to a per­centage of the re­covery in cases in which he had been in­volved.  U.S. v. Eisen, 974 F.2d 246 (2nd Cir. 1992).

 

2nd Circuit holds that failure to appear for sen­tencing is a continuing offense. (132) Defendant failed to appear for sentencing on May 27, 1987.  On February 24, 1990, he was arrested on unrelated charges, and even­tually pled guilty to failing to ap­pear for sen­tencing.  He argued that his offense was com­pleted on May 27, 1987, before the guide­lines’ effective date, November 1, 1987.  The 2nd Circuit held that failure to appear is a continuing of­fense, and thus the guidelines were applicable.  Al­though the explicit lan­guage of the statute does not indicate whether failure to appear is a continuing offense, the nature of the offense is continuing.  Each day that the defendant is absent enhances the dan­gers of delay in processing the case.  Fur­thermore, no statute of limitations applies to the crime of fail­ure to appear.  U.S. v. Lopez, 961 F.2d 1058 (2nd Cir. 1992).

 

2nd Circuit applies guidelines to de­fendant who committed no predicate acts after effective date of guidelines. (132) De­fendant was convicted of a RICO conspiracy which ran from 1973 to 1989.  The 2nd Cir­cuit upheld the application of the guidelines to defen­dant, even though he committed no predicate acts after November 1, 1987, the ef­fective date of the guidelines.  De­fendant did not withdraw from the con­spiracy, and there­fore remained fully li­able for the acts of co-conspirators.  The RICO conspirators here continued to act after the effective date of the guidelines, with full notice of the conse­quences.  Since defendant did not withdraw from the conspir­acy, he could be charged with the notice that his co-conspirators had when they acted.  U.S. v. Minicone, 960 F.2d 1099 (2nd Cir. 1992).

 

2nd Circuit affirms that local branches of union were part of same RICO enterprise. (132) Over a 35-year period, defendant held various posi­tions in the General Service Em­ployees International Union (the “International”), including president of Lo­cal 200, trustee of several employee funds, and secre­tary-trea­surer of Local 362.  He was convicted of a RICO in con­nection with his embezzlement and im­proper use of union funds.  Defendant contended that the sen­tencing guidelines did not apply to the RICO charge because the only racketeering act that occurred after the effective date of the guide­lines in­volved Local 362, which he con­tended was a separate RICO “enterprise” from Local 200 and the employee benefit funds.  The 2nd Circuit rejected this argu­ment, ruling that Local 362 was part of the same en­terprise as the other entities.  An “enterprise” under the RICO statute may consist of more than one entity, so long as those entities have been con­nected by a defendant’s participation in them through a pattern of racketeering ac­tivity.  Here, the indictment charged a broad enterprise that included Local 200, the pen­sion funds, and Local 362.  There was proof that these entities were all under the um­brella of the In­ternational, and that defendant participated in these otherwise lawful organi­zations through a pattern of racketeering.  U.S. v. Butler, 954 F.2d 114 (2nd Cir. 1992).

 

2nd Circuit applies guidelines to violation of April 1987 in­junction. (132) Defendant was convicted of crimi­nal con­tempt as a re­sult of his violation of an in­junction is­sued in April 1987, before the guidelines be­came ef­fective.  The 2nd Circuit rejected defendant’s claim that the guide­lines did not apply to his offense.  The crime for which de­fendant was convicted and sen­tenced was not the conduct leading to the injunction, but his continuing violations of that injunction from July 1987 through 1988.  The guide­lines apply to that crime, and their application to it did not con­stitute an ex post facto application of the law.  U.S. v. Lohan, 945 F.2d 1214 (2nd Cir. 1991).

 

3rd Circuit upholds application of guidelines to RICO vio­lation which began prior to and continued beyond guideline effective date. (132) Defendant argued that it was im­proper to apply the guidelines to his RICO of­fense which began prior to and continued after the ef­fective date of the guidelines.  The 3rd Cir­cuit agreed with the district court that RICO is a continuing offense “directly analogous to the crime of conspiracy,” and that therefore the guidelines were applicable to defendant’s RICO conviction.  The application of the guidelines to defendant’s offense did not vio­late the ex post facto clause.  Defendant elected to continue his illegal pattern of con­duct after the effective date of the guidelines, and the guidelines do not prescribe a higher sentence for his RICO offense than that pro­vided by pre-guidelines law.  U.S. v. Moscony, 927 F.2d 742 (3rd Cir. 1991).

 

4th Circuit applies guidelines to conspir­acy based on perjury committed October 29, 1987. (132) The 4th Circuit affirmed the applica­tion of the sentencing guidelines to a defendant con­victed of a RICO con­spiracy which straddled the effective date of the guidelines, November 1, 1987.  There was no ques­tion that the conspiracy was car­ried on before and af­ter the effective date of the guidelines.  A defendant’s membership in a conspir­acy is presumed to continue until he withdraws by affirmative action.  Here, there was ample evidence that defendant was in­volved as late as October 29, 1987, when he committed perjury before a federal grand jury.  Be­cause this perjury was committed just three days prior to the effective date of the guidelines, and there was no evidence of with­drawal, the finding that de­fendant’s membership con­tinued past the effective date of the guidelines was not clearly erroneous.  U.S. v. Bennett, 984 F.2d 597 (4th Cir. 1993).

 

4th Circuit affirms that tax conspiracy continued past effective date of guide­lines. (132) The 4th Cir­cuit affirmed that defen­dant’s tax conspiracy contin­ued beyond November 1, 1987, the effec­tive date of the guidelines.  Defendant conspired with his co-con­spirator to defraud the IRS by creating a $2.1 mil­lion false income tax deduction on de­fendant’s 1984 in­come tax return.  The de­duction was based on the payment of that sum by defendant to the co-conspira­tor in a fraudulent settlement of a sham law suit.  In an attempt to have the transaction withstand tax scrutiny, the co-conspirator believed he had to report the income.  Because the co-con­spirator did not file his 1984 tax return until June 1989, when he re­ported the $2.1 million as an income item, his con­duct in fur­therance of the conspiracy oc­curred during the period when the guidelines were applica­ble.  U.S. v. Hirschfeld, 964 F.2d 318 (4th Cir. 1992).

 

4th Circuit affirms that conspiracy continued past effective date of guidelines. (132) Defen­dants were involved in a conspiracy to fraudu­lently obtain HUD-insured mortgages, which they used to purchase property with a very low down-payment.  Although the mortgages were obtained in 1984 and 1985, the district court determined that the conspiracy continued past November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines, and thus sentenced defendants un­der the guide­lines.  Defendants argued that since the object of the con­spiracy was to obtain the HUD-insured mortgages, once the mort­gages were obtained this objective was achieved and the conspiracy ended.  The 4th Circuit rejected this contention, finding there were other objectives of the conspiracy.  First, one of the objects of the conspiracy was to make money by eventually reselling the prop­erty.  One conspirator proposed that if they held on to the property for three years, they would make a 40 percent return on the resale.  This showed that the conspiratorial agreement contemplated that the agreement would last for at least three years.  Second, a partnership formed by the conspirators continued to make mortgage payments well past November 1, 1987.  This part­nership was intimately involved in the fraudulent scheme.  U.S. v. Barsanti, 943 F.2d 428 (4th Cir. 1991).

 

4th Circuit reaffirms that applying guidelines to “straddle crime” does not violate Ex Post Facto Clause. (132) Defendant was found guilty of a drug conspiracy that continued from 1981 until March 1988.  He was sentenced un­der the guidelines.  Without discussion, the 4th Circuit rejected  de­fendant’s argument that ap­plying the guidelines to his crime violated the Ex Post Facto Clause even though it included punish­ment for conduct prior to November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  U.S. v. Deigert, 916 F.2d 916 (4th Cir. 1990).

 

4th Circuit holds that pre-guideline drug transactions were properly considered in RICO case. (132) At sen­tencing the district court counted as “relevant conduct,” drug trans­actions that occurred before the effective date of the guide­lines.  Two uncharged drug transactions be­fore the Jan­uary 15, 1988 amendments to guidelines sec­tions 1B1.2 and 1B1.3 were also included as relevant conduct.  De­fendant con­tend­ed that this violated the ex post facto clause.  The 4th Circuit rejected the argu­ment.  The RICO offense was a continuing offense.  Therefore applying the guidelines to conduct occur­ring before the effective date of guidelines does not violate the ex post facto clause.  The court doubted that § 1B1.3 had a different meaning after its amendment, but in any event, the amended version applied because de­fendant’s of­fense continued until January, 1989.  U.S. v. Cusack, 901 F.2d 29 (4th Cir. 1990).

 

4th Circuit holds ex post facto clause is not violated by ap­plying guidelines to conspiracies which began before effective date but contin­ued thereafter, and quan­tities of drugs throughout course of conspiracy may be ag­gregated. (132) Relying on decisions from other circuits, the 4th Circuit held that the ex post facto clause is not offended by (1) the ap­plication of the guidelines to con­spiracies which began before, but continued after the Nov. 1, 1987 date upon which the guidelines became ef­fective; and (2) the aggrega­tion of quantities of drugs which were the subject of the con­spiracy prior to the Nov. 1, 1987 with quantities distributed after that date.  To ex­clude part of the aggregate total weight would be incon­sistent with the overall quantitative approach of the nar­cotics guidelines.  U.S. v. Sheffer, 896 F.2d 842 (4th Cir. 1990).

 

5th Circuit applies guidelines to bank fraud where letter was prepared in late 1987 or early 1988. (132) Defendant argued that his bank fraud count should not have been subject to the guidelines because the fraud was complete before November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  The 5th Circuit upheld the application of the guidelines.  There was substantial evidence that a letter dated November 5, 1985 was actually prepared by defendant in late 1987 or early 1988. U.S. v. Henderson, 19 F.3d 917 (5th Cir. 1994).

 

5th Circuit finds no evidence that defendant withdrew from conspiracy. (132) Defendant argued that because his last overt act in furtherance of a drug conspiracy occurred in July 1987, four months before the guidelines became effective, he should not have been sentenced under the guidelines.  The 5th Circuit upheld the application of the guidelines.  The jury convicted defendant of a conspiracy that, according to the superseding indictment, continued until 1990.  Conspiracy is a continuing offense, and previous cases have upheld the application of the guidelines to a defendant who, while not participating in overt acts of the conspiracy after the guidelines took effect, failed to take affirmative actions to withdraw from it prior to the effective date of the guidelines.  Defendant took no such affirmative acts, and therefore remained responsible as a co-conspirator for all the acts charged to the conspiracy.  U.S. v. Martinez-Moncivais, 14 F.3d 1030 (5th Cir. 1994).

 

5th Circuit uses amended guidelines where defendants did not withdraw from conspiracy. (132) Defendants claimed they should not be sentenced under the guidelines effective November 1, 1989, because the conspiracy ended before that date.  The 5th Circuit upheld the use of the 1989 guidelines because the conspiracy continued until at least December 1989, when the leader’s house was searched.  Although defendants claimed that no acts took place after November 1, 1989, they did not argue that they withdrew from the conspiracy.  If a conspirator fails to effectively withdraw from a conspiracy, he will be sentenced under the amendments to the guideline even if he himself did not commit an act in furtherance of the conspiracy after the amendment’s effective date, if it was foreseeable that the conspiracy would continue past this date.  U.S. v. Thomas, 12 F.3d 1350 (5th Cir. 1994).

 

5th Circuit applies guidelines where false statement was made after guidelines’ effective date. (132) Defendant was convicted of perjury and making contradictory declarations before grand jury.  In each count, one statement was made before the effective date of the guidelines, and one was made afterward.  The 5th Circuit ruled that the applicability of the guidelines depended on whether the post-guideline statement was false.  Since a 1990 statement made by defendant was false, it was proper to apply the guidelines.  U.S. v. McAfee, 8 F.3d 1010 (5th Cir. 1993).

 

5th Circuit uses guidelines in effect when alien was discovered, rather than when he entered country. (132) Defendant il­legally re-entered the United States in April 1991.  Effective November 1, 1991, guideline section 2L1.2 was amended to in­crease the base of­fense level.  Thereafter, defen­dant was dis­covered and arrested on Novem­ber 21, 1991.  The 5th Circuit held it did not vi­olate the Ex Post Facto Clause to sentence defendant un­der the guide­lines in effect when he was found in the country, rather than under the more lenient guidelines in ef­fect when he re-entered the country.  There are three sepa­rate ways in which a deported alien may commit a violation of 8 U.S.C. section 1326(a);  one way is to be a deported alien found within the borders of the U.S.  Defen­dant ad­mitted that he was discovered after the effective date of the amendment.  U.S. v. Gonza­les, 988 F.2d 16 (5th Cir. 1993).

 

5th Circuit upholds application of guide­lines in ef­fect when conspiracy concluded. (132) Defendant argued that the guidelines in effect in 1988 should have been used in cal­culating his base offense level, and that the application of the 1990 amendments to the guidelines violated the Ex Post Facto clause.  The 5th Circuit affirmed that the application of the guide­lines in effect when the conspiracy ended did not vio­late the Ex Post Facto clause.  A conspiracy is a con­tinuing offense.  So long as there is evidence that the conspir­acy continued after the effective date of the guidelines, there is no ex post facto violation.  U.S. v. Buckhalter, 986 F.2d 875 (5th Cir. 1993).

 

5th Circuit says failure to treat series of embezzle­ments as “straddle” crimes was not plain error. (132) Defendant pled guilty to a series of 23 em­bezzlements.  18 oc­curred prior to the effective date of the guide­lines, and five occurred after the effective date of the guidelines.  Defendant was sentenced un­der pre-guidelines law for the first 18 counts, and was sentenced under the guide­lines for the last five counts.  He objected for the first time on appeal to the district court’s application of pre-guidelines law to the first 18 counts, contending that the series of embezzle­ments was a continuing “straddle” crime to which the guidelines should be fully applicable.  The 5th Circuit found that the failure to treat the embez­zlements as a strad­dle crime was not plain error.  Whether a number of embezzlements are continuing of­fenses depends on the par­ticular facts of the case.  If a court con­cludes that later embez­zlements covered up earlier ones, it is entitled to find the offenses are continuing in nature.  When a legal conclusion de­pends in part upon discreet factual findings and the court is never directed to those facts, its legal conclu­sion is almost never obviously wrong.  U.S. v. Gaudet, 966 F.2d 959 (5th Cir. 1992).

 

5th Circuit rules wire fraud is not a con­tinuing of­fense. (132) The district court im­posed a $1 million fine under the Criminal Fine Enforcement Act of 1984, then codified at 18 U.S.C. section 3623.  Section 3623 pro­vided for a fine of $250,000 for any felony commit­ted between January 1, 1985 and November 1, 1987, and $1,000 per count for any wire fraud offense com­mitted before January 1, 1985.  All six wire transfers for which defendant was convicted occurred in 1984.  The 5th Circuit held that the $1 mil­lion fine violated the ex post facto clause, re­jecting the government’s claim that although the actual fraudulent wire transfers for which defen­dant was convicted occurred in 1984, the scheme to defraud continued into 1985 and should be treated as a continuing offense.  Each wire transmission in furtherance of a scheme to defraud constitutes a sep­arate crime.  It is not the scheme to defraud but the use of the mails or wire that constitutes mail or wire fraud.  U.S. v. St. Gelais, 952 F.2d 90 (5th Cir. 1992).

 

5th Circuit finds no ex post facto violation in application of guidelines to conspiracy that began prior to guidelines’ ef­fective date. (132) The 5th Circuit found no ex post facto violation in the application of the guidelines to a con­spiracy which began prior to the enactment of the guide­lines.  Although defendant contended that his participation in the conspiracy was not shown to have continued past the effec­tive date, he did not argue that he withdrew from the con­spiracy by taking affirmative acts incon­sistent with the con­spiracy and communicated this to his conspirators.  U.S. v. Puma, 938 F.2d 151 (5th Cir. 1991).

 

5th Circuit applies guidelines to conspiracies which be­gan before, but continue after November 1, 1987. (132) Re­lying on its earlier decision in  U.S. v. White, 869 F.2d 822 (5th Cir. 1989), the 5th Circuit held that the guidelines apply to a defen­dant who joined a conspiracy to manu­facture metham­phetamine which was already in existence on November 1, 1987, but contin­ued thereafter.  No ex post facto viola­tion oc­curred from the application of the guidelines to this offense.  U.S. v. Boyd, 885 F.2d 246 (5th Cir. 1989).

 

5th Circuit holds that conspiracy which con­tinued after November 1, 1987 falls within guidelines. (132) Defen­dant argued that be­cause she had joined the conspiracy before the effective date of the guidelines, it violated the ex post facto clause to impose a guideline sen­tence.  The 5th Cir­cuit disagreed.  Because conspiracy is a contin­uing offense, and the evi­dence showed that her role continued after November 1, 1987, it was proper for her to be sen­tenced under the guidelines.  U.S. v. White, 869 F.2d 822 (5th Cir. 1989).

 

6th Circuit holds that fraudulent activity was a continuing offense. (132) Defendant used the names and social security numbers of her family and customers to obtain bank loans.  She contended that her sentence vio­lated the ex post facto clause because some of the loans were obtained prior to November 1, 1989, when the fraud guideline was amended to increase the offense level for losses of be­tween $200,000 and $500,000.  The 6th Cir­cuit rejected this claim, holding that the fraudulent activity was a continuing offense.  Although there were multiple victims, they were defrauded through a single scheme.  The character of their losses did not change when the guidelines were amended.  The guidelines in effect when defendant was sen­tenced applied to the entire scheme of bank fraud.  U.S. v. Buckner, 9 F.3d 452 (6th Cir. 1993).

 

6th Circuit applies guidelines to conspir­acy even though no overt acts occurred af­ter Novem­ber 1, 1987. (132) The 6th Cir­cuit held that it was error not to apply the guidelines to defendants’ con­spiracy convic­tions even though no overt acts in fur­therance of the conspiracy occurred after the guide­lines be­came effective.  Because of the ongo­ing nature of con­spiracies, the guidelines ap­ply to conspiracies which begin before but continue beyond the effective date of the guidelines.  Here, the tax evasion conspir­acy de­scribed in the indictment began in April 1983 and continued until June 1988.  U.S. v. Alt, 996 F.2d 827 (6th Cir. 1993).

 

6th Circuit holds that unsuccessful at­tempts to collect drug money after guide­lines’ effective date were acts of conspir­acy. (132) The 6th Circuit re­jected defen­dant’s claim that this was a pre-guideline case because his drug conspiracy ended before November 1, 1987.  Twice in November 1987, a co-conspirator traveled to Detroit for the purpose of collecting money for heroin delivered in October 1987.  The two trips, while unsuccessful, were acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.  Thus, defendant was in­volved in a continuing offense that straddled the effective date of the guidelines, and could be sen­tenced under the guidelines without vi­olating the ex post facto clause.  U.S. v. Markarian, 967 F.2d 1098 (6th Cir. 1992).

 

6th Circuit holds that guidelines apply to con­spiracies which begin before, but continue af­ter effective date of guidelines. (132) Several drug defendants contended that they were sentenced in violation of the ex post facto clause because their conspiracy began before the effec­tive date of the guidelines, but contin­ued there­after.  The 6th Circuit disagreed, holding that one who com­mits a continu­ing offense beginning before the ef­fective date of the guide­lines and ending after the effec­tive date of the guidelines can be sentenced under the guidelines without violating the ex post facto clause.  Furthermore, it is not necessary for the government to prove that the defen­dants committed an act in further­ance of the con­spiracy or knew of acts committed af­ter the effective date of the guidelines in order to be sen­tenced under the guidelines.  Under the Pinkerton rule, con­spirators are held liable for foreseeable acts of their cocon­spirators com­mitted in furtherance of the con­spiracy.  In or­der to escape liability for acts committed after the effective date of the guidelines, defendants must prove that they af­firmatively withdrew from the conspiracy before the effective date.  U.S. v. Walton, 908 F.2d 1289 (6th Cir. 1990).

 

6th Circuit holds offenses which continue af­ter amend­ment of statute are subject to pun­ishment under it. (132) A prison escapee claimed that the district court erred in sen­tencing him to a three year term of super­vised release be­cause 18 U.S.C. § 3583(b)(2) only provided for two years of supervised re­lease at the time of his escape.  How­ever, the statute was amended effec­tive December 7, 1987, to provide for a three year term, and the defendant was cap­tured on April 20, 1988.  Es­cape is a continuing offense, and is therefore punishable under statutes which are amended while the offense is still continuing.  U.S. v. Vanover, 888 F.2d 1117 (6th Cir. 1989).

 

7th Circuit holds that old Rule 35 did not permit court to resentence defendant under guidelines. (132) Defendant was sentenced to 20 years un­der pre-guidelines law for a RICO conspiracy.  Over two years later, the government asked the court to resentence defendant, arguing that his original sen­tence was illegal because the conspiracy continued beyond November 1, 1987 (the effective date of the guidelines).  The district court granted the motion and resentenced defendant to 20 years under the guidelines, which effectively increased defendant’s sentence.  The 7th Circuit reversed, holding that the district court was without authority to resentence defendant.  The court agreed that old Rule 35(a), rather than the amended Rule 35, was applicable.  But the court had authority only to correct an illegal sentence.  Defendant’s sentence was legal when im­posed.  U.S. v. Corbitt, 13 F.3d 97 (7th Cir. 1993)

 

7th Circuit applies guidelines to defendant who did not prove he withdrew from con­spiracy. (132) The 7th Circuit upheld ap­plying the guidelines to a defendant who did not prove that he withdrew from a drug con­spiracy before November 1, 1987, the effec­tive date of the Sentencing Guidelines.  In fact, there was evidence that he participated in the activities of the conspiracy as late as August 31, 1990. U.S. v. DePriest, 6 F.3d 1201 (7th Cir. 1993).

 

7th Circuit holds that defendant waived challenge to application of guidelines. (132) Defendant argued that he should not have been sentenced under the guidelines be­cause his involvement in the con­spiracy ended before November 1, 1987.  The 7th Circuit held that defendant waived this argu­ment be­cause he failed to timely object either to the recom­mendation in the presentence report or to the district court’s finding at the sentencing hearing that the guidelines were applicable.  Moreover, the argument was meritless.  Even if defendant committed no act in furtherance of the conspiracy after November 1, 1987, mere cessation of activity is insufficient for withdrawal.  Defendant did not make an affirmative act to either defeat or disavow the purposes of the conspiracy.  U.S. v. Price, 988 F.2d 712 (7th Cir. 1993).

 

7th Circuit upholds application of guide­lines to “straddle” conspiracy. (132) The 7th Circuit af­firmed that there was no ex post facto violation in applying the sentencing guidelines to defendant, who pled guilty to a conspiracy that began in January 1986 and ended in June 1989.  The effective date of the guidelines was November 1, 1987.  Defendant could have avoided the guidelines by ceasing the criminal conspiracy prior to November 1987.  How­ever, defendant continued, and the new sentencing provisions justly applied.  U.S. v. Jack­son, 983 F.2d 757 (7th Cir. 1993).

 

7th Circuit finds no withdrawal from con­spiracy before effective date of guidelines. (132) Defendant was origi­nally sentenced under pre-guidelines law.  In his first ap­peal, he adopted all of the arguments of his co-con­spirator, who claimed he should have been sen­tenced under the guidelines because the conspir­acy contin­ued past the effective date of the guidelines.  At resen­tencing, defendant saw his co-conspirator re­ceive a much harsher sentence under the guidelines, and at­tempted to withdraw his request for resen­tencing.  The 7th Circuit affirmed resentenc­ing de­fendant under the guidelines.  Defen­dant’s re­quest not to be resentenced came too late.  He should have asked the first panel to rescind the portion of the judgment remand­ing his case.  Defen­dant was prop­erly sen­tenced under the guide­lines because he con­ceded that the criminal enter­prise continued past the effective date of the guide­lines, and there was no evi­dence that he withdrew from the conspiracy.  U.S. v. Masters, 978 F.2d 281 (7th Cir. 1992).

 

7th Circuit remands to determine whether conduct continued beyond ef­fective date of guide­lines. (132) As a result of defen­dant’s involvement in a conspiracy, he was convicted of pos­sessing with in­tent to dis­tribute 10 kilo­grams of cocaine.  Although it was undisputed that the conspiracy contin­ued be­yond the effective date of the guide­lines, the district court sentenced defendant under the guidelines with­out expressly de­termining whether defen­dant’s con­duct charged in the indictment occurred after such effective date.  The 7th Circuit remanded for the lim­ited purpose of making such a determina­tion.  U.S. v. Centracchio, 977 F.2d 1061 (7th Cir. 1992).

 

7th Circuit remands for resentencing on all counts where sentence for one count was improper under pre-guide­lines law. (132) Defendant was con­victed of 19 different fraud related counts, including one count of conspir­acy to commit mail fraud.  He was sen­tenced under pre-guidelines law on all counts to 27 years’ impris­onment.  The 7th Circuit agreed with defendant that he should have been sentenced under the guidelines for his conspiracy convic­tion, since the conspir­acy “straddled” the guidelines’ effec­tive date.  It found that resentencing was necessary for all counts, not just the conspiracy count, be­cause the district court had an overall sen­tencing plan in mind when it im­posed its sen­tence on each count.  In order to allow the dis­trict court to re­consider its plan as a whole in sen­tencing defendant, resentencing on all counts was necessary.  U.S. v. Lowry, 971 F.2d 55 (7th Cir. 1992).

 

7th Circuit upholds application of guide­lines where defendant did not prove with­drawal from conspiracy prior to guide­lines’ effective date. (132) The 7th Circuit affirmed the applicability of the guidelines to defendant since the government estab­lished that the conspiracy extended beyond Novem­ber 1, 1987.  One conspirator testified that he re­ceived a total of three or four separate kilo­gram de­liveries of cocaine from another co-conspirator, and that the last delivery oc­curred sometime in the late fall of 1987 or early winter of 1988.  After examining the co-conspirator’s telephone toll records at trial, the conspirator stated that his beeper num­ber ap­peared on the record four times in 1988.  This evi­dence supported the conclu­sion that the conspiracy continued after November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  Moreover, defendant alleged, but failed to present evidence, that he had with­drawn from the conspiracy prior to Novem­ber 1, 1987.  U.S. v. Agrell, 965 F.2d 222 (7th Cir. 1992).

 

7th Circuit affirms that conspiracy contin­ued past effective date of guidelines. (132) The 7th Circuit af­firmed the application of the guidelines to defen­dant, finding sufficient evidence to support the dis­trict court’s con­clusion that the conspiracy continued past Novem­ber 1, 1987.  Calls were made from de­fendant’s phone to a co-conspirator’s beeper number after November 1, 1987.  Further, the co-conspirator testified that his last transaction with the conspiracy occurred sometime in the late fall of 1987 or early win­ter 1988.  Defendant presented no evidence that he withdrew from the con­spiracy.  Al­though a defen­dant does not bear the bur­den of proving withdrawal from a conspiracy, he does have the burden of pre­senting sufficient affirmative evi­dence to raise the is­sue for the jury.  U.S. v. Rossy, 953 F.2d 321 (7th Cir. 1992).

 

7th Circuit rules defendant did not with­draw from conspiracy. (132) The 7th Circuit upheld the district court’s determination that defendant did not withdraw from a drug con­spiracy prior to the effec­tive date of the guidelines.  Although defendant testi­fied that he told the conspiracy’s leader that he no longer wished to partici­pate, the district court was entitled to disbelieve that testimony and rely on the testimony of another cocaine pur­chaser and federal undercover agents who de­scribed defendant’s in­volvement after his al­leged with­drawal.  U.S. v. Bafia, 949 F.2d 1465 (7th Cir. 1991).

 

7th Circuit rules defendant who ceased selling drugs after smashing co-conspira­tor’s car did not withdraw from conspir­acy. (132) The 7th Cir­cuit re­jected defen­dant’s claim that he committed no acts in fur­therance of the conspiracy after the effec­tive date of the guidelines.  His acts were not part of a separate conspiracy as he contended.  However, even if they were, and defen­dant committed no acts in fur­therance of the con­spiracy after the guidelines’ effec­tive date, he was still liable because he did not with­draw from the conspiracy.  Although defendant de­molished a co-con­spirator’s car and stopped selling cocaine for him be­cause they were no longer on good terms, defendant did not per­form an affirmative act renouncing the goals of the conspiracy.  U.S. v. Bafia, 949 F.2d 1465 (7th Cir. 1991).

 

7th Circuit holds failed attempt to smuggle drugs was in furtherance of conspiracy. (132) All of the marijuana im­ported by a drug conspiracy came into the country prior to November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  However, the drug ring unsuc­cessfully attempted to smug­gle two additional drug shipments into the country after November 1, 1987.  The 7th Cir­cuit held that the failed at­tempts to smuggle drugs were in furtherance of the importa­tion conspiracy.  There­fore, the conspiracy was a straddle crime, and the guidelines were applicable to the offense.  U.S. v. Morri­son, 946 F.2d 484 (7th Cir. 1991).

 

7th Circuit upholds application of guide­lines to “straddle” conspiracy. (132) Defen­dant contended that since his con­spiracy be­gan prior to the effective date of the guide­lines, it violated the ex post facto clause to ap­ply the guidelines to the offense.  The 7th Cir­cuit re­jected this con­tention, since the con­spiracy continued past the effective date of the guide­lines.  Moreover, the constitutional prohibi­tion against ex post facto punish­ment is directed principally toward pun­ishment for acts not illegal at the time of their commis­sion or an unex­pected punishment.  Defen­dant’s participation in the distribution of co­caine and heroin was at no time legal.  U.S. v. Rosa, 946 F.2d 505 (7th Cir. 1991).

 

7th Circuit affirms application of guidelines to con­spiracy that began prior to effective date of guidelines. (132)  Defendant contended that it violated the ex post facto clause to apply the guidelines to his conspiracy of­fense since he en­gaged in acts before, as well as after, the ef­fective date of the guidelines.  The 7th Circuit, following recent Circuit prece­dent, found no ex post facto violation.  U.S. v. McKenzie, 922 F.2d 1323 (7th Cir. 1991).

 

8th Circuit says offenses that are part of common scheme are like continuing offenses. (132) Defendant pled guilty to a mail fraud that occurred in March and April of 1989.  The conduct consisted of defendant, in his position as investment advisor, defrauding a client of investment funds.  He also pled guilty to transporting money stolen from another one of his clients, from March 1989 through at least January 1990.  The 8th Circuit held that it did not violate the ex post facto clause to apply the November 1989 guidelines to the mail fraud count, since it was part of the same common scheme or plan as the stolen money count.  Some offenses, such as conspiracy, are “continuing offenses” for which the completion date controls which version of the guidelines should apply.  A “common scheme or plan” or “same course of conduct” by an individual is the unilateral equivalent of the continuing offense of conspiracy.  Therefore, the district court’s application of the guideline in effect at the time of sentencing did not violate the ex post facto clause.  U.S. v. Reetz, 18 F.3d 595 (8th Cir. 1994).

 

8th Circuit upholds application of guide­lines to “straddle” conspiracy. (132) The 8th Circuit af­firmed the ap­plication of the guidelines to defendant’s conspiracy, since al­though it began be­fore the effec­tive date of the guidelines, it ended after such date.  All other counts against defendant occurred after the guidelines’ effective date.  U.S. v. Davila, 964 F.2d 778 (8th Cir. 1992).

 

8th Circuit affirms that defendant did not with­draw from conspiracy prior to guide­lines’ effective date. (132) The 8th Circuit upheld the application of the guidelines to a defendant convicted of drug con­spiracy, rul­ing that defendant did not prove that he with­drew from the conspiracy prior to the guide­lines’ effective date.  Moreover, the govern­ment presented evidence showing defendant’s involvement in the conspiracy after the guidelines’ effective date.  On November 1, 1987, defendant called the co-conspira­tor’s sister and asked when the co-conspirator would be returning from California.  Since California was the source of the conspiracy’s cocaine, and the co-conspirator did re­turn from California with cocaine, it was reason­able to assume that the telephone call was in furtherance of the conspiracy.  In addition, testimony by another conspirator linked de­fendant to the conspiracy as late as October, 1988.  U.S. v. Granados, 962 F.2d 767 (8th Cir. 1992).

 

8th Circuit upholds inclusion of drugs dis­tributed by conspiracy after defendant moved to California. (132) From January to September 1987, de­fendant and three co-conspirators were involved in drug-related ac­tivities in Lincoln, Nebraska.  In September 1987, defendant and his fiancée abruptly moved to California.  At trial defendant testi­fied that they moved to escape the drug scene in Lincoln and to avoid a debt he had in­curred.  After the move, he made occasional phone calls to his co-conspirators in Lincoln, but did not actively participate in the distri­bution of cocaine.  The 8th Circuit upheld the appli­cation of the guidelines to his offense, and held him accountable for certain amounts of cocaine dis­tributed by the con­spiracy after he left for California.  Conspir­acy is a continuing offense, and a defendant may be sentenced under the guidelines for his par­ticipation in any conspiracy that con­tinued past November 1, 1987, even if the de­fendant performed no overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy after this date.  The district court found that although the exact amount of cocaine dis­tributed after defendant’s move was not foreseeable, it was reasonably fore­seeable that the conspiracy would continue to receive cocaine after defendant’s move, and that such amounts would be equal to at least three times the amounts previ­ously trans­ferred by the conspiracy.  U.S. v. Older­bak, 961 F.2d 756 (8th Cir. 1992).

 

8th Circuit upholds application of guidelines to “straddle” conspiracy. (132) Defendant was convicted of a conspir­acy that “straddled” the effective date of the guidelines, thus making the guidelines applicable to the offense.  De­fendant argued that a government agent who was a professional hyp­notist used his skills as a hypnotist, improperly inducing de­fendant to sell the agent some cocaine in 1988.  This caused the guidelines to apply to defendant’s offense.  The 8th Cir­cuit found no due process violation in the use of the hypno­tist as a gov­ernment agent.  The hypnotist was a friend of defen­dant’s and defendant testified at his sen­tencing that once he was presented with an op­portunity to sell cocaine, he went along with it.  He did not raise an entrapment de­fense or al­lege that the hypnotist unduly influenced him.  U.S. v. Pregler, 925 F.2d 268 (8th Cir. 1991).

 

8th Circuit rules that guidelines apply to con­spiracy that ended after Nov. 1, 1987. (132) Defendant argued that sentencing him under the guidelines violated the ex post facto clause of the Constitution because there was no evi­dence of conspiratorial activity after Nov. 1, 1987 — the effec­tive date of the guidelines.  The 8th Circuit rejected the ar­gument, noting that the jury found in a special interrogatory that the conspiracy continued be­yond Nov. 1, 1987.  In addi­tion, the district court found that the conspiracy continued until May 12, 1988.  The court upheld the district court’s find­ing as not clearly er­roneous.  U.S. v. Wayne, 903 F.2d 1188 (8th Cir. 1990).

 

8th Circuit holds that consideration of drugs possessed prior to November 1987 does not violate ex post facto clause. (132) The 8th Cir­cuit held that because drug sales prior to the ef­fec­tive date of the guidelines were part of a continuing course of conduct, the district court did not violate the ex post facto clause when it aggre­gated those uncharged quanti­ties in de­termining the defendant’s of­fense level.  No ex post facto vi­olation oc­curs when the defendant is sentenced for a crime which occurred after November 1, 1987, as was the case here.  U.S. v. Allen, 886 F.2d 143 (8th Cir. 1989).

 

8th Circuit rules that guidelines in effect on date con­spiracy ends are to be used to deter­mine range. (132) The 8th Circuit held that there is no violation of the ex post facto clause when a defendant is sentenced under guide­lines which become effective while the conspir­acy was still continuing.  Thus, it was proper to sentence a defendant under the initial guide­lines when the conspir­acy continued until Jan­uary 1988 even though it may have begun be­fore the guidelines became effective.  U.S. v. Walker, 885 F.2d 1353 (8th Cir. 1989).

 

8th Circuit holds that guidelines apply to con­spiracies beginning before, but con­tin­uing af­ter effective date of guidelines. (132) Drug defen­dant appealed the applica­tion of the guidelines to his convic­tion for a drug conspir­acy.  The 8th Circuit re­jected his challenge.  The defen­dant and the government had stipu­lated that the con­spiracy occurred during the first week of October and continued until his arrest on November 24, 1987.  The court held that application of the guidelines to the con­spiracy would not violate the ex post facto clause, and the enabling statutes mandated ap­plication of the guide­lines to continuing of­fenses.  U.S. v. Tharp, 884 F.2d 1112 (8th Cir. 1989).

 

9th Circuit upholds considering acts of bribery and losses after guidelines amended. (132) Defendant was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States, bribery, and other crimes arising out of corrupt practices as an employee of the IRS.  He argued that the district court erred in applying a two level increase under an amended guideline provision because there was only one bribe after the provision was amended.  In a 2-1 opinion, the Ninth Circuit disagreed, finding there were multiple criminal acts after the amendment and that it was properly applied.  The district court did not “pour over” the loss from one count to another but correctly and separately considered the pre- and post-guideline conduct for each of the counts.  The doctrine of “continuing offense” does not apply where the charged criminal conduct itself extends over a period of time.  Here the conduct was a scheme that extended over a period of time. U.S. v. Morales, 11 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 1993).

 

9th Circuit finds no need to apportion loss be­tween pre- and post-guideline dates where sen­tences were concurrent. (132) Although mail and wire fraud sentences that straddle the sentencing guidelines effective date of November 1, 1987 are not deemed to be continuing offenses and must be sen­tenced separately, the district court can avoid the risk of double counting losses by sen­tencing concur­rently on the pre- and post-guideline counts.  Here, the district court properly imposed concurrent sen­tences, and therefore there was no need to apportion the loss calculations between pre- and post-guideline dates.  U.S. v. Mullins, 992 F.2d 1472 (9th Cir. 1993).

 

9th Circuit holds that 1987 amendment to Rule 35(a) limits court’s power to correct sentence. (132) Prior to November 1, 1987, Rule 35(a), Fed. R. Crim. P. permitted the district court to “correct an illegal sentence at any time.”  On November 1, 1987, however, the rule was amended to permit a district court to correct a sentence only on remand from an appellate court which has deter­mined that the sentence was “imposed in vi­olation of the law [or] the sentencing guide­lines, or [was] unreasonable.”  Here, the de­fendant was convicted of a conspiracy that ended in March, 1988.  Thus, it did not vio­late the prohibition against ex post facto laws to apply the new rule to him.  Under the new rule, the district court had no power to cor­rect his sentence.  U.S. v. Henrique, 988 F.2d 85 (9th Cir. 1993).

 

9th Circuit reiterates that mail fraud is not a con­tinuing offense under guidelines, de­spite contrary ruling as to restitution. (132) In U.S. v. Niven, 952 F.2d 289, 293 (9th Cir. 1991), the 9th Circuit held that mail and wire fraud are not continuing of­fenses: “Each of­fense is complete when the fraudu­lent matter is placed in the mail or transmit­ted by wire, respectively.”  Defendant ar­gued that Niven conflicted with U.S. v. Angelica, 859 F.2d 1390, 1393 (9th Cir. 1988) which held that a defendant could be required to pay restitution under the Victim and Witness Pro­tection Act for all losses caused by his mail fraud scheme even though most of the fraudulent transac­tions occurred prior to the effec­tive date of the act.  The 9th Circuit found no conflict between the two cases, noting that Angelica was interpreting the Vic­tim and Witness Protection Act, whereas Niven was interpreting the Sen­tencing Guide­lines.  Accordingly, the district court did not err in sentencing the defen­dant without resort to the guidelines. U.S. v. Scarano, 975 F.2d 580 (9th Cir. 1992).

 

9th Circuit applies amended guideline to conspir­acy, but application to sub­stantive counts was ex post facto. (132) Agreeing with every other cir­cuit that has addressed the issue, the 9th Circuit held that the amended guidelines applied to the conspir­acy that continued after the date of the amend­ment.  How­ever, the court held that it was er­ror to apply the amended guidelines to the substantive drug posses­sion of­fenses which occurred prior to the effective date of the amended guidelines.  The court held that this vi­olated the ex post facto clause, and the case was re­manded to the district court to resen­tence the defen­dant under the 1988 guide­lines on the substan­tive counts.  U.S. v. Cas­tro, 972 F.2d 1107 (9th Cir. 1992).

 

9th Circuit holds that mail and wire fraud are not continuing offenses. (132)  The 9th Circuit held that 18 U.S.C. section 1341 and 1343, mail and wire fraud, are not continuing offenses because “each of­fense is complete when fraudulent matter is placed in the mail or transmitted by wire.”  Thus the district court did not err in sentencing the defendant under pre-guidelines law for those counts committed prior to November 1, 1987.  U.S. v. Niven, 952 F.2d 289 (9th Cir. 1991), overruling on other grounds recognized by U.S. v. Ortland, 109 F.3d 539 (9th Cir. 1997).

 

9th Circuit states that guidelines apply to “continuing offenses” that continue after November 1, 1987. (132) Relying on U.S. v. Frank, 864 F.2d 992, 1008 (3rd Cir. 1988), the 9th Circuit stated that the “Sentencing Guide­lines apply to offenses initiated before Novem­ber 1, 1987, but not completed until after November 1, 1987.”  Thus the guidelines ap­plied to defendant’s “continuing” offense of failure to appear in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3146(a).  U.S. v. Gray, 876 F.2d 1411 (9th Cir. 1989).

 

9th Circuit holds applying increased penalty provisions to conspiracy which ended shortly after amendment did not violate ex post facto clause. (132) The increased penalties of the comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 be­came effective on October 12, 1984.  The indict­ment charged that the methamphetamine conspiracy ended November 2, 1984, and there was evidence that it did in fact continue to that date.  Accordingly, Circuit Judges Hall and Sneed and District Judge Stephens held that applying the increased penalty provisions of the new Act did not violate the ex post facto clause.  U.S. v. Cal­abrese, 825 F.2d 1342 (9th Cir. 1987).

 

10th Circuit rules defen­dants did not with­draw from con­spiracy before guidelines’ effec­tive date. (132) The 10th Circuit re­jected three defen­dants’ claim that they with­drew from their drug con­spiracy prior to November 1, 1987, the effec­tive date of the guidelines.  Although the partnership of two of the defendants may have ended prior to November 1, 1987, the conspiracy continued in spite of the part­nership breakup.  The dis­trict court found that the conspiracy contin­ued into early 1991, and there was consider­able evidence of one defendant’s drug activity until his arrest in 1989.  Although the second defen­dant contended that he stopped dis­tributing mari­juana for the conspiracy in Oc­tober 1987, at trial he testified that he was not sure of the date, and other witnesses tes­tified that he was in­volved at least through 1988.  There was over­whelming evidence that the third defendant was in­volved in drug distri­bution activities through 1991.  U.S. v. Powell, 982 F.2d 1422 (10th Cir. 1992).

 

10th Circuit refuses to review alternate sentence under 1988 guidelines since de­fendant was prop­erly sentenced under 1990 guidelines. (132) The 10th Circuit re­fused to review defendant’s claim that the court erred in imposing a 12-year alternate sentence under the 1988 guidelines.  Since the dis­trict court properly sentenced defen­dant under the 1990 guidelines, the propriety of the alternate sentence under the  1988 guidelines was not necessary.  The applica­tion of the 1990 guidelines did not violate the ex post facto clause.  Defendant pled guilty to a conspiracy com­mencing at least as early as 1984 and continuing until the return of the indictment on January 10, 1991.  U.S. v. Burger, 964 F.2d 1065 (10th Cir. 1992).

 

10th Circuit rules defendant did not with­draw from conspiracy prior to effective date of amended guidelines. (132) The 10th Circuit found sufficient evidence that de­fendant was part of a drug conspir­acy after November 1, 1989, the date the offense level for con­spiracy was increased.  In 1988, a co-conspir­ator told an undercover agent that his source of metham­phetamine was in California and that he sometimes received as much as two pounds from California.  A package sent to the co-conspirator in August, 1990 con­tained one pound of metham­phetamine and had been mailed from California.  In addition, the items seized from the co-conspirator in 1990 were the same items used by the co-conspirator in 1988 in defendant’s presence to conceal, package and dis­tribute metham­phetamine.  This evidence was sufficient for the district court to conclude that the con­spiracy continued until August, 1990.  U.S. v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1320 (10th Cir. 1992).

 

10th Circuit applies guidelines in effect when con­spiracy ended rather than when it began. (132) The offense level specified in the 1988 guidelines was four levels lower than the offense level effective November 1, 1989.  The 10th Circuit upheld the dis­trict court’s decision to apply the 1989 guide­lines, which were in effect when the conspiracy ended, rather than the 1988 guidelines, which were in effect when the conspiracy be­gan.  There is no vi­olation of the ex post facto clause in applying the guidelines in ef­fect at the time of the last act of the conspiracy.  U.S. v. Stanberry, 963 F.2d 1323 (10th Cir. 1992).

 

10th Circuit affirms that defendant com­mitted acts in fur­therance of conspiracy after his 18th birthday. (132) Defendant became involved in a drug conspiracy as a juve­nile.  Although he turned 18 during the course of the con­spiracy, he contended that there was no evi­dence that he re­mained in­volved in the conspiracy after his 18th birth­day, and therefore the district court had no jurisdiction over him because he was a juve­nile.  The 10th Circuit re­jected the ar­gument, noting that even though defendant moved out of state on his 18th birth­day, he came back for a visit.  Two po­lice officers testi­fied that several weeks after defendant moved, they ob­served him and a co-defendant apparently selling co­caine.  This testimony was corrobo­rated by a state­ment that a co-defendant made to an un­dercover police offi­cer.  U.S. v. Harris, 944 F.2d 784 (10th Cir. 1991).

 

10th Circuit rejects ex post facto challenge to ag­gregation of losses from pre-guide­lines and post-guidelines offenses. (132) Counts 1 through 7 were pre-guidelines of­fenses and counts 8 through 10 were post-guidelines offenses.  The 10th Circuit rejected de­fendant’s claim that it violated the ex post facto clause to calculate the loss caused by his crime under guide­line sections 2B1.1 and 2F1.1 based upon the total loss  involved in both the pre- and post-guidelines offenses.  Enhancement of a guidelines sentence based on losses associated with pre-guidelines of­fenses does not violate the ex post facto clause.  U.S. v. Haddock, 956 F.2d 1534 (10th Cir. 1992), unaffected on rehearing, 961 F.2d 933 (10th Cir. 1992), abrogated on other grounds by U.S. v. Wells, 519 U.S. 482, 117 S.Ct. 921 (1997).

 

10th Circuit rules government failed to estab­lish that con­spiracy continued past guidelines’ effective date. (132) The 10th Circuit found that the government failed to offer any evi­dence that the conspiracy of which defendant was a member continued past November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  The only evidence offered by the govern­ment to show conspiratorial activity by anyone beyond this date was testimony that a cocaine buyer of a co-defendant sold the cocaine in 1988.  The co-defendant had sold the co­caine to the buyer in December 1987.  However, this was after the co-defendant terminated his conspiracy with defen­dant and began a new conspiracy.  Thus, defendant was im­properly sentenced under the guidelines.  U.S. v. Harrison, 942 F.2d 751 (10th Cir. 1991).

 

10th Circuit applies guidelines to conspiracy beginning be­fore effective date. (132) Relying on past circuit prece­dent, the 10th Circuit re­jected defendant’s claim that the ex post facto clause was violated by applying the guidelines to a conspiracy that began before their effec­tive date but contin­ued after that time.  U.S. v. Shewmaker, 936 F.2d 1124 (10th Cir. 1991).

 

11th Circuit holds that escape from cus­tody is a continuing offense. (132) Defen­dant escaped from federal custody July 11, 1986, prior to the effective date of the guide­lines.  He was arrested and charged with es­cape on April 30, 1991, after the effective date of the guidelines.  The 11th Circuit af­firmed that ap­plying the guidelines to defen­dant did not violate the ex post facto clause, even though the guidelines im­posed a harsher punishment than the law in effect when de­fendant escaped from custody.  Escape is a continuing offense and an escapee can be held liable for failing to return to custody as well as for the ini­tial departure.  Although de­fendant did not speak or read English, the court rejected defendant’s claim that he was never adequately warned of the changes in the way escape was treated under the guide­lines.  The government is not required to take special steps to apprise the public of the exis­tence of newly en­acted penal laws.  U.S. v. Tapia, 981 F.2d 1194 (11th Cir. 1993).

 

11th Circuit finds defendant did not withdraw from con­spiracy prior to effective date of guidelines. (132) De­fendant argued that he should not have been sen­tenced un­der the guidelines for his conspiracy conviction be­cause he engaged in no criminal activity after the ef­fective date of the guidelines.  The 11th Circuit rejected this contention.  The ex post facto clause does not bar application of the guidelines to conspiracies that began before and continued after the ef­fective date of the guidelines.  In order to avoid sentencing under the guidelines, a conspirator must prove that he with­drew from the conspiracy prior to the effective date.  Defen­dant alleged that he re­fused to make any further drug courier trips prior to the effective date.  However, mere cessa­tion of criminal activity does not consti­tute with­drawal.  Defendant contin­ued to de­mand payment for his earlier trips.  His assertion that he refused to act as a courier was irrelevant if he contin­ued to de­mand that he be paid for his prior illegal activ­ity.  U.S. v. Nixon, 918 F.2d 895 (11th Cir. 1990).

 

11th Circuit holds that consideration of con­duct before ef­fective date of guidelines is proper in a conspiracy of­fense. (132) Defen­dant argued that the court improperly re­lied on drug deliveries before the guidelines’ effective date when it imposed sentence on his conspir­acy convic­tion.  The 11th Circuit disagreed, holding that Congress did not intend to pro­hibit reliance on conduct prior to the guide­lines’ ef­fec­tive date when it affirmatively di­rected the sentencing courts to include relevant conduct in furtherance of a con­spir­acy when calculating guideline ranges.  Since conspiracy is a con­tin­uing crime, the in­crease in penalty for a conspiracy be­gin­ning before the date of enactment but continuing afterwards did not vi­olate the ex post facto clause.  U.S. v. Terzado-Madruga, 897 F.2d 1099 (11th Cir. 1990).

 

D.C. Circuit concludes that conspiracy continued beyond effective date of guide­lines. (132) Defen­dant and his brother con­spired to make false claims against a gov­ernment fund to be used to reimburse certain victims of discrimination.  The D.C. Circuit upheld the application of the sentencing guidelines, concluding that the conspiracy continued beyond the guidelines’ effective date.  The conspiracy continued at least until February 1988, when defendant’s brother sent a check to the some of the fraudulent claimants.  An act of a co-conspirator may ex­tend the conspiracy so long as the act was done in furtherance of the conspiracy, was within the scope of the un­lawful project, and could be reasonably foreseen as a necessary or natural consequence of the unlawful agreement.  U.S. v. Milton, 8 F.3d 39 (D.C. Cir. 1993).

 

D.C. Circuit applies guidelines to “straddle” con­spiracy. (132) Defendants were convicted of various counts relating to a conspiracy to commit tax fraud against the United States.  The D.C. Circuit affirmed the application of the guidelines to the conspir­acy, even though it occurred before and after November 1, 1987, the effective date of the guidelines.  It was not material that the jury did not specify whether the purpose of the conspiracy was to make false state­ments or to evade taxes, since the district court itself determined that both objects of the conspir­acy con­tinued after November 1, 1987.  Since the timing of the conspiracy implicated sen­tencing only, the dis­trict court was entitled to make a factual determina­tion under the pre­ponderance of the evidence stan­dard.  The jury was not required to find that each defen­dant continued to participate in the conspir­acy after November 1, 1987.  Defendants had the burden of proving that they affirmatively withdrew from the conspiracy before that date, and they failed to do so.  U.S. v. Dale, 991 F.2d 819 (D.C. Cir. 1993).

Browse Contents

  • 100 Pre-Guidelines Sentencing, Generally
  • 110 Guidelines Sentencing, Generally
  • 150 Application Principles, Generally
  • 200 Offense Conduct, Generally
  • 400 Adjustments, Generally
  • 500 Criminal History, Generally
  • 550 Determining the Sentence
  • 700 Departures, Generally
  • 750 Sentencing Hearing, Generally
  • 780 Plea Agreements, Generally
  • 800 Violations of Probation and Supervised Release
  • 840 Sentencing of Organizations
  • 850 Appeal of Sentence (18 U.S.C. §3742)
  • 880 Habeas Corpus / 28 U.S.C. 2255 Motions
  • 900 – Forfeitures, Generally

Recent Newsletters
in PDF format

  • May 5, 2025
  • April 21, 2025
  • April 7, 2025
  • March 24, 2025
  • March 10, 2025

Recent Indices
in PDF format

  • April 7, 2025
  • February 10, 2025
  • December 30, 2024
  • October 21, 2024
  • August 26, 2024
© James Publishing, Inc. (866) 72-JAMES (866-725-2637)
Last Updated 12/16/13