|
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DONNA HARDY, Defendant-Appellant. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Tennessee at Jackson.
No. 07-10037-001—James D. Todd, District Judge.
Argued: October 13, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 20, 2009
Before: KENNEDY and ROGERS, Circuit Judges; HOOD, District Judge.
HOOD, Senior District Judge. A jury convicted Defendant-Appellant Donna Hardy (“Defendant”) of twelve counts of bank fraud and five counts of tax evasion. This appeal arises from the district court’s exclusion of defense evidence. The district court found that Defendant had failed to comply with the reciprocal discovery requirement of Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(c) and excluded certain evidence. Defendant filed a Motion for a New Trial, which was denied, and this appeal followed. Defendant appeals on the grounds that the district court erred in excluding evidence and violated her rights under the United States Constitution’s Sixth Amendment compulsory process clause. For the reasons which follow, Defendant’s conviction is AFFIRMED.
|
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARCELLUS THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland.
No. 06-00565-002—Lesley Brooks Wells, District Judge.
Submitted: October 13, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 20, 2009
Before: KENNEDY and ROGERS, Circuit Judges; HOOD, District Judge.
HOOD, Senior District Judge. Defendant-Appellant Marcellus Thompson (“Thompson”) appeals the district court’s sentence upon his plea of guilty to a charge of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. The district court determined that the applicable advisory sentencing guideline range was 24 to 30 months and sentenced Thompson to 28 months’ imprisonment. Thompson claims that this sentence is improper because the district court calculated his sentencing guideline range by including a twopoint enhancement for a juvenile confinement that occurred less than two years prior to the instant offense. The two-point enhancement increased the sentencing guideline range from 18 to 24 months to 24 to 30 months. Thompson argues that his sentence is procedurally unreasonable in contravention of § 4A1.1(e) of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) and requests that his sentence be vacated and remanded to the district court for resentencing. In response, the United States of America has argued that the guideline range was properly calculated and that the sentence was procedurally reasonable.
For the reasons which follow, the opinion of the district court is AFFIRMED.
|
THOMAS WHITE, Petitioner-Appellee, v. CAROL R. HOWES, Respondent-Appellant. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 06-10707—Marianne O. Battani, District Judge.
Submitted: June 19, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 20, 2009
Before: McKEAGUE and WHITE, Circuit Judges; MARBLEY, District Judge.
WHITE, Circuit Judge. Respondent Carol Howes, Warden of the correctional facility at which Petitioner Thomas White is serving Michigan state court sentences, appeals from the district court’s order granting habeas relief. We reverse.