West v. United States
631 F.3d 563
1st Cir.2011Background
- West was convicted of two counts of possession with intent to distribute and distribution of cocaine after informant-provoked sales; he faced potential entrapment defenses and introduced prior drug convictions at sentencing; vacatur of a 2001 Massachusetts conviction altered whether he qualified as a career offender; the Massachusetts courts vacated and later restored the 2001 conviction, affecting the federal sentencing range; the district court granted a continuance to review the vacatur, delaying sentencing; West ultimately received 180 months with 10 years of supervised release despite a guideline range of 262–327 months for career offenders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective | West | West's counsel failed to pursue entrapment and failed to timely appeal | No reversible error; strategy reasonable and no prejudice |
| Whether the continuance of sentencing was proper | West | Continuance to resolve vacaturwas justified | Continuance within district court discretion; no abuse given circumstances |
| Whether there was sentencing factor manipulation | West | No extraordinary government misconduct | No improper manipulation; actions amounted to ordinary inquiry within investigation scope |
| Whether West's sentence is reasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) | West | Sentence is too harsh given status and quantities | Sentence reasonable; district court adequately explained rationale and mitigated by history and low-scale crimes |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance standard; defendant must show deficient performance and prejudice)
- Tevlin v. Spencer, 621 F.3d 59 (1st Cir. 2010) (strong presumption of reasonable assistance; strategy not patently unreasonable)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 858 F.2d 809 (1st Cir. 1988) (entrapment analysis requires inducement and predisposition elements)
- United States v. DePierre, 599 F.3d 25 (1st Cir. 2010) (sentencing factor manipulation framework; focus on government conduct and predisposition)
- United States v. Jaca-Nazario, 521 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2008) (standard for sentencing manipulation; deference to district court findings)
- United States v. Fontes, 415 F.3d 174 (1st Cir. 2005) (recognizes sting operations; manipulation reserved for extreme cases)
- United States v. Fink, 499 F.3d 81 (1st Cir. 2007) (continuance due to vacatur review; limits on speedy sentencing concerns)
- United States v. Saccoccia, 58 F.3d 754 (1st Cir. 1995) (continuance factors for sentencing decisions)
- United States v. Fanfan, 468 F.3d 7 (1st Cir. 2006) (requires extreme government misconduct for manipulation claim)
- United States v. Casas, 425 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2005) (good-cause continuance in sentencing contexts)
- Rivera-Gonzalez v. United States, 626 F.3d 639 (1st Cir. 2010) (reasonableness review framework for sentencing)