United States v. Feng Li
682 F. App'x 56
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant-appellant Shu Feng Xia appealed resentencing to time served (10 months and 2 days) and a joint-and-several forfeiture assessment of $965,000 imposed by the Southern District of New York.
- Xia had requested at resentencing the exact sentence the district court imposed (time served).
- Xia challenged the substantive reasonableness of the sentence and argued the forfeiture violated the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed the sentence challenge for invited error and the forfeiture challenge for plain error (because Xia did not raise the constitutional argument below).
- The district court ordered joint-and-several forfeiture liability, which permits Xia to seek contribution from co-defendants proportionate to culpability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Substantive reasonableness of sentence | Government: sentence of time served is appropriate | Xia: sentence is substantively unreasonable and creates unwarranted disparity with similarly situated defendants | Denied — claim barred by invited error because Xia requested the same sentence below |
| Constitutionality of $965,000 forfeiture under Excessive Fines Clause | Government: forfeiture lawful; joint-and-several liability proper | Xia: forfeiture is grossly disproportionate and thus excessive under Eighth Amendment | Denied — reviewed for plain error; no plain error because joint-and-several order preserves right to seek contribution, undermining claim of gross disproportionality |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wells, 519 U.S. 482 (establishes invited error doctrine)
- United States v. Sharpe, 996 F.2d 125 (explains invited error principle)
- United States v. Bastian, 770 F.3d 212 (applies invited error; defendant’s deliberate conduct can forfeit appellate complaints)
- United States v. Ferguson, 758 F.2d 843 (discusses deliberate course of conduct in invited error context)
- United States v. Aldeen, 792 F.3d 247 (sentencing objections not raised below reviewed for plain error)
- United States v. Castello, 611 F.3d 116 (burden on defendant to show forfeiture is grossly disproportional)