The Law Office of Tom Norrid
SAMARITAN PROJECTS LLC
P.O. Box 9244
Springfield, MO 65801-9244
The SAMARITAN-PROJECT prepares post-conviction and compassionate release motions under the direction of Attorney Tom Norrid. The Project retrieves documents at reasonable prices. The Project newsletter reports every winning published district court and court of appeals case for the week in review.
CR.RIS/REHABILITATION/YOUTH. The Southern District of New York granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Alfredo Gallego, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40743 (S.D. N.Y. Mar. 6, 2025). At 23 years old, Gallego conspired with others, including his older brother George to rob a United States Postal Service truck. During the robbery Gallego shot and killed the USPS truck driver, Guillermo Gonzalez. Gallego was convicted of the premeditated murder of a federal employee which carried a mandatory life sentence. Gallego has served approximately 32 years of his sentence, and he is now 55 years old. Gallego's sentence was reduced to a term of 430 months to be followed by a lifetime term of supervised release. In addition to his thorough rehabilitation the Court considered Gallego's extensive mentorship, leadership, and service to others. Gallego was not a minor at the time of the murder. At 23 years old, he was a young adult. Yet psychological and scientific research — and increasingly, the law — recognize that a young adult may be more prone to reckless behavior and susceptible to outside influences. At 23, due to ongoing cognitive development, Gallego still was maturing and as evidenced by George's own statements Gallego may have been especially vulnerable to the pressure and manipulation of his older brother. A reduced sentence would provide Gallego the opportunity to pursue his planned post-graduate educational and vocational training and to seek adequate medical care from a Veterans Affairs facility. Gallego presents a low risk of reoffending because of his demonstrated rehabilitation, model disciplinary record, age, thorough and feasible reentry plan, and family and community support. The Bureau of Prisons has classified Gallego at the lowest level recidivism risk, and concluded he displays all categories of inmate reentry skills that can serve him as a productive law abiding citizen.
CR.RIS/DISPARITY/REHABILITATION/USSG 1B1.13(b)(6). The Western District of New York granted a CR.RIS motion in United States v. Harold Klump, 2035 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36557 (W.D. N.Y. Feb. 28, 2025). Klump was charged in a three-count indictment with violating (1) 21 USC 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A) (manufacture of 1,000 or more marijuana plants), (2) 21 USC 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A) (possession of 1,000 or more marijuana plants, with intent to distribute), and (3) 18 USC 924(c)(1)(A) and (c)(1)(B)(i) (possession of a semi-automatic assault weapon in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime). Klump was sentenced to 360 months. The court concluded Klump's 30-year sentence for marijuana and gun possession convictions constitutes an "unusually long sentence" under USSG 1B1.13(b)(6). A "serious drug felony" does not encompass mere possession offenses such as Klump's 1993 felony attempted possession conviction. Compare 21 USC 802(57) with 802(44). The Court accepted the Government's concession the 1994 amendment to 924(c)(1)(B)(i) increasing the penalty for possessing a semi-automatic weapon was effectively repealed in 2004 by a sunset provision. Sentence reduced to time served.
APPEAL/ERLINGER. The Sixth Circuit vacated and remanded United States v. Calvin Cogdill, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 4902 (6th Cir. Mar. 3, 2025). This case was returned after the Supreme Court vacated this court’s earlier decision and remanded for reconsideration following Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024). After defendant pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, the district court, over Cogdill’s objection, determined that he committed three prior drug offenses “on occasions different from one another,” subjecting him to an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Erlinger later clarified it was error for the judge, instead of a jury, to make that occasions decision. The court vacated Cogdill’s sentence and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
2255/CASE AGENT CONVICTED. The District of Utah granted a 2255 motion in Jacob MacFarlane v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36403 (D. Utah Feb. 27, 2025). MacFarlane was charged with Conspiracy to Distribute (bath salts) in violation of 21 USC 841(a)(1) and 846. After MacFarlane pled guilty the court sentenced him to 46 months. A substantial part of the evidence in MacFarlane's case was seized and processed by one of two Homeland Security Investigations special agents who have now themselves been accused of a conspiracy to distribute bath salts. After being discovered to be under the influence of drugs in an FBI vehicle Special Agent Matthew Lowry was charged with and pled guilty to 64 counts of Obstruction of Justice; Destruction, Alteration, or Falsification of Records in Federal Investigation; Conversion of Property; and Possession of Heroin. Defendant’s sentence reduced to time served.
APPEAL/RESENTENCE. The Eleventh Circuit vacated and remanded United States v. Stevenson Charles. 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 4772 (11th Cir. Feb. 28, 2025). Charles engaged in a series of violent crimes against gay men while on probation. Using the dating app Grindr, he lured victims to locations where he brandished a firearm, forced them into their cars, and directed them to banks or stores to withdraw money or purchase gift cards. Charles physically assaulted one victim and shot another multiple times. A federal grand jury indicted him on 17 counts, including carjacking, brandishing and discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, kidnapping, and bank robbery. Charles pled guilty to all counts without a plea agreement. The Southern District of Florida sentenced him to 45 years and 15 years of supervised release despite the statutory maximum for supervised release being five years. The court justified the extended supervised release term by noting Charles's stipulation to it in exchange for a reduced prison sentence. The Government objected to the supervised release term arguing it exceeded the statutory maximum and could invalidate the entire sentence. The Eleventh Circuit held a statutory maximum punishment is not waivable and the district court lacked the authority to impose a supervised release term exceeding the statutory maximum of five years. The court vacated Charles's sentence and remanded for resentencing emphasizing the court must impose a new sentence considering the statutory sentencing factors without relying on an illegal term of supervised release.
APPEAL/RESENTENCE. The Third Circuit vacated and remanded United States v. Rodney Ashe, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 4593 (3d Cir. Feb. 27, 2025). Ashe was pulled over by police for failing to maintain his lane. During the stop, officers observed a handgun in his sweatshirt pocket leading to his arrest and the impoundment of his car. Six months later while Ashe was incarcerated a duffle bag containing an AK-style pistol and ammunition was found in the trunk of his car by a towing company employee. Ashe pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm related to the handgun found during the traffic stop. The Government and defense argued for a total offense level of 12 but the District Court found a total offense level of 17 applying an enhancement for possession of the AK-style pistol. The court determined a preponderance of the evidence supported Ashe’s constructive possession of the AK pistol based on its location in his trunk and his history of firearm-related offenses. Ashe was sentenced to 37 months. The Third Circuit found the District Court erred in applying the enhancement without sufficient evidence Ashe possessed the AK pistol. The appellate court noted that the six-month gap between Ashe’s arrest and the discovery of the firearm, combined with the lack of direct evidence linking Ashe to the AK pistol, did not meet the preponderance of the evidence standard required for constructive possession. The Third Circuit vacated and remanded for resentencing without the enhanced base offense level.
APPEAL/MIRANDA. The Tenth Circuit vacated and remanded United States v. Christopher Kee, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 4570 (10th Cir. Feb. 27, 2025). Kee was convicted of assault with a dangerous weapon in Indian country following an altercation with his then-girlfriend, Candace Chinchillas. Kee claimed the stabbing incident was an act of self-defense while Chinchillas described it as a violent attack. Kee was acquitted of three other counts of assault which had more corroborative evidence but was convicted on Count 2 which relied heavily on the conflicting testimonies of Kee and Chinchillas. The District of New Mexico presided over Kee's trial. After being convicted and sentenced, Kee appealed arguing his due process rights were violated under Doyle v. Ohio, which prohibits the use of a defendant's post-Miranda silence for impeachment purposes. The Tenth Circuit agreed with Kee the prosecution's repeated references to his post-Miranda silence constituted a clear violation of Doyle. The court found the Doyle violation affected Kee's substantial rights because the case hinged on the credibility of Kee and Chinchillas, and the improper impeachment could have influenced the jury's verdict. The Tenth Circuit vacated Kee's conviction and sentence and remanded the case.
APPEAL/RESENTENCE; The Fifth Circuit vacated and remanded United States v. Juan Cisneros, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5289 (5th Cir. Mar. 6, 2025). In Jan. 2023, law enforcement executed a search warrant which resulted from a narcotics investigation. They found ammunition but no drugs or firearms attributable to him. Cisneros admitted to using the ammunition previously but claimed his mother-in-law purchased it. He was charged with possessing ammunition as a convicted felon under 18 USC 922(g)(1). The Southern District of Texas denied Cisneros's motion to dismiss the indictment which argued that 922(g)(1) was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and exceeded Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. Cisneros pled guilty but reserved the right to appeal on Second Amendment grounds. The Fifth Circuit reviewed Cisneros's facial challenge to 922(g)(1) was foreclosed by precedent, and his as-applied challenge failed under plain error review. The court affirmed his conviction, finding no clear or obvious error in the application of 922(g)(1) under the Second Amendment. However, the court found the district court plainly erred in applying the sentencing enhancement under USSG 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possessing ammunition in connection with another felony offense. The court noted there was no evidence the ammunition facilitated drug trafficking, as required by precedent. This error affected Cisneros's substantial rights, as it likely resulted in a longer sentence. Consequently, the Fifth Circuit vacated Cisneros's sentence and remanded for resentencing.