United States v. Fisher
2011 WL 832942
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- FSA increased crack/powder cocaine thresholds for mandatory minimums; pre-FSA conduct may be governed by old amounts.
- Fisher pled guilty in Feb 2010 to conspiracy to distribute crack; presentence report attributed 150–500 grams, with guideline range 140–175 months; Fisher urged 120–150 months.
- District court declined to resolve quantity dispute and sentenced Fisher to 120-month mandatory minimum based on 50+ grams.
- Dorsey pled guilty on June 3, 2010; still sentenced Sept 10, 2010 under pre-FSA framework despite August 3, 2010 activation.
- Fisher appealed after sentencing; Dorsey argued FSA should apply to post-August 3, 2010 sentencing; Supreme issue is retroactivity of FSA and appropriate timing for retroactivity analysis.
- Court reaffirmed Bell and held FSA does not apply retroactively; savings statute governs retroactivity; relevant date is underlying conduct, not sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retroactivity of the FSA under savings statute | Fisher argues retroactive application should follow FSA | Government relies on Bell rejecting retroactivity | FSA not retroactive; savings statute applies |
| Relevant date for retroactivity analysis | Dorsey seeks retroactivity based on sentencing date | FSA should apply only to conduct after Aug. 3, 2010 | Retroactivity determined by underlying conduct date, not sentencing date |
| Whether Bell should be reconsidered or distinguished | Dorsey urges necessary implication supports retroactivity | Bell controls; no necessary implication to retroactivity | Bell remains controlling; no retroactive application |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bell, 624 F.3d 803 (7th Cir.2010) (savings statute prevents retroactive application of FSA absent congressional signal)
- United States v. Gomes, 621 F.3d 1343 (11th Cir.2010) (savings statute bars retroactivity of FSA)
- United States v. Carradine, 621 F.3d 575 (6th Cir.2010) (same theme on retroactivity limitations)
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. United States, 208 U.S. 452 (1908) (necessary implication standard for retroactivity in savings statute context)
- Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244 (1994) (statutory interpretation when evaluating retroactivity; avoid cherry-picked history)
- Warden, Lewisburg Penitentiary v. Marrero, 417 U.S. 653 (1974) (congressional power over punishment for federal crimes)