United States v. Sylvester Purham
667 F. App'x 552
| 7th Cir. | 2016Background
- Sylvester Purham pled guilty (no plea agreement) to conspiracy to distribute 280+ grams of crack cocaine under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 and was sentenced to 360 months and 10 years supervised release.
- Purham attempted to withdraw his plea but the district court denied that motion after a hearing.
- On first appeal (Purham I), this Court reversed aspects of the relevant-conduct calculation and remanded for resentencing; the district court later imposed a 324-month term.
- On second appeal (Purham II), this Court affirmed the 324-month sentence but vacated two supervised-release conditions (community-service and gang-association) and remanded for limited proceedings.
- On remand the district court, with the government’s agreement, struck the two conditions without holding a hearing and entered an amended judgment; Purham filed a third direct appeal.
- Appointed counsel moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, arguing the successive appeal was frivolous; the court grants the Anders motion and dismisses the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court could strike the two supervised-release conditions without a hearing | Purham would argue the court acted improperly by not holding a hearing | Court acted improperly by failing to provide a hearing | Struck conditions without a hearing was proper: remand order limited, relief was favorable, did not extend supervised release, and government did not object (Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1(c)(2)) |
| Whether other challenges may be raised on this subsequent appeal given the limited remand | Purham seeks to raise additional sentencing or plea claims | Court: other issues were waived because they could have been raised earlier | Other challenges are frivolous/waived under the mandate rule and Parker (issues not arising from the limited remand were waived) |
| Whether the 324-month sentence can be challenged again | Purham argues the sentence is erroneous | Court: the 324-month sentence already affirmed in Purham II | Challenge foreclosed by Purham II; not reviewable on this successive appeal |
| Whether the acceptance of Purham’s guilty plea can be challenged now | Purham contends the plea acceptance was erroneous | Court: plea issue could have been raised in earlier appeal | Waived because it could have been raised previously; not open on this appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (standards for counsel to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
- United States v. Purham, 754 F.3d 411 (7th Cir. 2014) (Purham I) (reversed relevant-conduct error and remanded)
- United States v. Purham, 795 F.3d 761 (7th Cir. 2015) (Purham II) (affirmed 324-month term, vacated two supervised-release conditions, limited remand)
- United States v. Young, 66 F.3d 830 (7th Cir. 1995) (mandate rule requires district court to follow appellate commands on remand)
- United States v. Parker, 101 F.3d 527 (7th Cir. 1996) (issues not arising from the correction ordered on remand and not raised on original appeal are waived)