United States v. Haney case brief summary
287 F.3d 1266 (2002)
CASE FACTS
Defendant asserted that the district court erred in (1) not permitting him to raise a defense of duress, and (2) failing to grant him a reduction in offense level for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1. A co-defendant, who was white, was warned by black inmates that a race war was brewing and the co-defendant was a target. Accordingly, the co-defendant decided to attempt to escape from prison. Defendant assisted the co-defendant in collecting a variety of escape paraphernalia.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The conviction and sentence were vacated, and the matter was remanded.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
287 F.3d 1266 (2002)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant was convicted of possession
of escape paraphernalia in prison in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. §
1791(a)(2) in the United States District Court for the District
of Colorado. Defendant appealed.CASE FACTS
Defendant asserted that the district court erred in (1) not permitting him to raise a defense of duress, and (2) failing to grant him a reduction in offense level for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1. A co-defendant, who was white, was warned by black inmates that a race war was brewing and the co-defendant was a target. Accordingly, the co-defendant decided to attempt to escape from prison. Defendant assisted the co-defendant in collecting a variety of escape paraphernalia.
DISCUSSION
- The court found that the defense of duress extended to third parties.
- Further, defendant produced adequate evidence to create a jury issue as to whether there was a threat of immediate infliction of death or bodily harm, and whether defendant and the co-defendant each lacked a reasonable legal opportunity to avert the threatened harm.
CONCLUSION
The conviction and sentence were vacated, and the matter was remanded.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment