Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. LUTHER WAYNE SMITH, Defendant–Appellant.
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE UNITED STATES
Luther Wayne Smith appealed his 100–month sentence, imposed after re-sentencing, for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). This Court affirmed Smith's sentence based on prior precedent. United States v. Smith, 370 F. App'x 59 (11th Cir.2010). However, the Supreme Court granted Smith's petition for writ of certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded Smith's appeal for reconsideration in light of Pepper v. United States, 562 U.S.
U.S. _, 131 S.Ct. 1598 (2011).
On remand for re-sentencing, Smith argued that the district court should consider his post-sentence rehabilitative conduct in determining his new sentence. The district court expressly rejected consideration of Smith's post-sentence rehabilitation in its sentencing calculus, stating that it was prohibited from doing so by this Court's decision in United States v. Lorenzo, 471 F.3d 1219, 1221 (11th Cir.2006) (holding that “post-sentence rehabilitative conduct is an impermissible factor for the district court's consideration” at sentencing). We affirmed on the same grounds.
In Pepper, however, the Supreme Court abrogated this Court's opinion in Lorenzo, and held that
when a defendant's sentence has been set aside on appeal, a district court at resentencing may consider evidence of the defendant's postsentencing rehabilitation and ․ such evidence may, in appropriate cases, support a downward variance from the now-advisory Federal Sentencing Guidelines range.
131 S.Ct. at 1236. Pepper makes clear that a district court may consider post-sentence rehabilitative conduct at re-sentencing.
In light of Pepper, we vacate our prior opinion in this case, United States v. Smith, 370 F. App'x 59 (11th Cir.2010), vacate Smith's sentence, and remand for re-sentencing so that the district court may consider Smith's post-sentence rehabilitative conduct as permitted under Pepper.
PRIOR DECISION VACATED; SENTENCE VACATED, and REMANDED.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 09–13307 Non–Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 06–00064–CR–FTM–29–DNF
Decided: April 21, 2011
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)