794 F.3d 881 (7th Cir. 2015), 14-2419, United States v. Dupriest

Docket Nº:14-2419
Citation:794 F.3d 881
Opinion Judge:Kanne, Circuit Judge.
Party Name:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MONTRELL DUPRIEST, Defendant-Appellant
Attorney:For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Jonathan H. Koenig, William J. Lipscomb, Attorney, Office of The United States Attorney, Milwaukee, WI. For Montrell Dupriest, Defendant - Appellant: Daniel J. Hillis, Attorney, Office of The Federal Public Defender, Springfield, IL; Thomas W. P...
Judge Panel:Before RIPPLE, KANNE and TINDER, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:July 27, 2015
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
SUMMARY

In 2006, DuPriest pled guilty to “Use of a Telephone to Facilitate a Drug Trafficking Crime.” Judge Stadtmueller sentenced DuPriest to a 48-month term of imprisonment and a 12-month term of supervised release, to run concurrently with DuPriest’s related Wisconsin state sentence. DuPriest was released in 2012. Five months later, while serving his concurrent terms of supervised release, Milwaukee... (see full summary)

 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 881

794 F.3d 881 (7th Cir. 2015)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MONTRELL DUPRIEST, Defendant-Appellant

No. 14-2419

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

July 27, 2015

Argued February 20, 2015.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. No. 2:04-cr-00285 -- J.P. Stadtmueller, Judge.

For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Jonathan H. Koenig, William J. Lipscomb, Attorney, Office of The United States Attorney, Milwaukee, WI.

For Montrell Dupriest, Defendant - Appellant: Daniel J. Hillis, Attorney, Office of The Federal Public Defender, Springfield, IL; Thomas W. Patton, Attorney, Office of The Federal Public Defender, Peoria, IL.

Before RIPPLE, KANNE and TINDER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

Kanne, Circuit Judge.

This case comes before us on a second appeal from a supervised release revocation hearing. The first time we heard this case, we remanded for resentencing after the government conceded that the term of imprisonment--eighteen months--exceeded the statutory maximum by six months. This time, the issue before us is whether the district court failed to consider the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors before resentencing Appellant Montrell DuPriest.1

Page 882

I. Background

In 2006, DuPriest pled guilty to one count of " Use of a Telephone to Facilitate a Drug Trafficking Crime." Notably, Judge Stadtmueller served as the sentencing judge for that offense. He sentenced DuPriest to a forty-eight-month term of imprisonment and a twelve-month term of supervised release. Judge Stadtmueller ran the sentence concurrently with DuPriest's related state sentence in Wisconsin.

DuPriest was released from confinement on November 15, 2012. Five months later, while serving his concurrent terms of state and federal supervised release, Milwaukee police arrested DuPriest after observing him enter an abandoned house. The officers searched him and found a pistol and forty-three small bags of marijuana. The State of Wisconsin charged DuPriest in Milwaukee County Court with possession of a firearm and possession with intent to deliver THC. Wisconsin dismissed those charges once the federal government took over prosecution, but it did seek incarceration for the violation of his state supervised release. He eventually received an eighteen-month sentence on the state violation.

DuPriest subsequently pled guilty to the federal offense of being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). That plea had two immediate consequences. First, it meant that DuPriest would be sentenced for the firearm offense under § 922(g). And second, it meant that DuPriest would then face mandatory revocation and a second term of imprisonment for violating the terms of his federal supervised release. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(g).

District Judge Adelman served as the sentencing judge for the underlying § 922(g) offense. He sentenced DuPriest to a thirty-three-month term of imprisonment and a twenty-four-month term of supervised release. Judge Adelman ran that sentence concurrently to DuPriest's eighteen-month state revocation sentence.

In consideration for DuPriest's guilty plea before Judge Adelman, the government agreed to recommend a federal revocation sentence that would run concurrently with his sentence for the underlying crime under § 922(g). The government upheld its end of the bargain. The only question that remained was whether the judge at the revocation hearing would...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP