Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

US v. Clay, No. 08-1372

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on September 04, 2009 5:19 PM

Defendants' sentences and convictions on various drug and firearm offenses are affirmed where: 1) district court did not improperly enhance defendant Stovall's sentence, as the plea agreement did not exclude consideration of the murder for enhancement and the government did not violate the plea agreement; 2) district court did not abuse its discretion by granting the government's motion to sever, as Stovall has not demonstrated how he was prejudiced by the court's grant of the motion, and even if it was an abuse of discretion, it was harmless error; 3) Stovall has not shown that the district court committed reversible error in applying Rule 32, and thus his claim of inadequate notice of evidence from defendant Clay's case is unavailing and did not amount to denial of the right to counsel; 4) district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence, as the application of section 2D1.1(d) did not violate Stovall's due process rights and the sentence was reasonable and within the properly calculated Guidelines range; 5) the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to have found that a conspiracy existed in determining that Clay was aware of and part of the conspiracy; 6) district did not commit clear error in denying Clay's motion to suppress, as the seizure of the items during the warrant search was in plain view and their incriminating nature was immediately apparent; 7) the district court erred in sentencing Clay pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 924(c) instead of section 924(o), but reversal is unwarranted as his sentence is supported by evidence on other count; and 8) defendant Clay's sentence of 480 months on conspiracy to distribute marijuana was reasonable. 

Read US v. Clay, No. 08-1372

Appellate Information

Submitted: February 12, 2009

Filed: September 4, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Smith, Circuit Judge

Find a Lawyer

More Options