Thursday, March 12, 2009

So Hot-Off-the-Press that Further Details Will Have to Follow—924(c)s Not Always Consecutive?!

There’s some inauspicious Sixth Circuit case law out there like United States v. Jolivette, 257 F.3d 581, 586–87 (6th Cir. 2001), but good things may be happening. Second Circuit just found that the mandatory minimum under 924(c)(1)(A) is inapplicable when the defendant is subject to a higher mandatory minimum sentence for a drug-trafficking offense when that latter offense is part of the same criminal transaction. United States v. Williams, No. 07–2436 (2d Cir. Mar. 5, 2009). I will look at the case and get back to you (yes, I’m pretty much just gossiping right now).

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Does this mean in a case of bank robbery involving brandishing a weapon the sentence for the two offenses sould run concurrently - not consecutively?