Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Robertson, 1st Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views5 pages
    The court affirmed the district court's ruling applying an obstruction of justice enhancement to the defendant's sentence. The court found that the pre-sentence report and sentencing guidelines provided adequate notice that the enhancement could be applied. The court also rejected the defendant's arguments in his supplemental brief that challenged the search warrant affidavit, sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, calculation of his sentence, and degree of sentencing departure. The court dismissed the defendant's bail appeal as moot.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-06-28 Precedential Status: Precedential Docket: 98-2130

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The court affirmed the district court's ruling applying an obstruction of justice enhancement to the defendant's sentence. The court found that the pre-sentence report and sentencing guidelines provided adequate notice that the enhancement could be applied. The court also rejected the defendant's arguments in his supplemental brief that challenged the search warrant affidavit, sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, calculation of his sentence, and degree of sentencing departure. The court dismissed the defendant's bail appeal as moot.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views5 pages

    United States v. Robertson, 1st Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The court affirmed the district court's ruling applying an obstruction of justice enhancement to the defendant's sentence. The court found that the pre-sentence report and sentencing guidelines provided adequate notice that the enhancement could be applied. The court also rejected the defendant's arguments in his supplemental brief that challenged the search warrant affidavit, sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, calculation of his sentence, and degree of sentencing departure. The court dismissed the defendant's bail appeal as moot.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 5

    USCA1 Opinion

    [NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]


    United States Court of Appeals
    For the First Circuit

    No. 98-2130

    UNITED STATES,

    Plaintiff, Appellee,

    v.

    JERRY LEE ROBERTSON,

    Defendant, Appellant.
    ____________________

    No. 99-1460

    UNITED STATES,

    Appellee,

    v.

    JERRY LEE ROBERTSON,

    Defendant, Appellant.

    APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

    [Hon. Ronald R. Lagueux, U.S. District Judge]

    Before

    Selya, Boudin and Lynch,


    Circuit Judges.

    William T. Boyle on brief for appellant.


    Jerry Lee Robertson on supplemental brief pro se.
    Margaret E. Curran, United States Attorney, and Stephanie S.
    Browne, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

    June 24, 1999

    Per Curiam.

    Upon careful review of the record and the briefs,

    we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in applying
    an enhancement for obstruction of justice.

    The guidelines

    themselves, as well as the pre-sentence report, gave ample notice


    that the enhancement might be applied.

    The district court's

    findings were specific enough, and we have no reason to secondguess the district court's negative view of defendant's probity.
    We also have reviewed to the extent possible the arguments
    raised in defendant's supplemental brief.

    Even were those

    arguments adequately developed and properly before us, we would


    find no merit in any of them.

    Contrary to defendant's arguments:

    the affidavit sufficiently supported the warrant; the evidence


    sufficiently supported the convictions; and the jury instructions
    sufficiently explained the elements of the offenses and the
    government's burden of proof.

    Further, defendant's sentence was

    calculated appropriately in light of the conviction for possession


    with intent to distribute heroin within 1000 feet of a school; the
    weapons enhancement was not clearly erroneous in light of the
    circumstances in which the drugs and guns were found; and,
    considering defendant's criminal past along with the outstanding
    warrants, we cannot say that the degree of the departure was
    outside the district court's discretion in such matters.
    The judgment is affirmed.

    See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.

    bail appeal, no. 98-2130, is dismissed as moot.

    The

    You might also like