United States Seventh Circuit

Convictions and sentences on drug conspiracy charges are affirmed over arguments that: 1) the district court erred by increasing a sentence based on an unsupported factual finding that defendant refused legitimate employment; 2) one defendant's Guidelines range sentence was unreasonably harsh; 3) one defendant's counsel rendered ineffective assistance by not informing him of the difference between sentences for crack and powder cocaine; and 4) crack and cocaine sentencing differences violate the Equal Protection Clause.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/21/2007
• Decided 04/30/2007
• Published 04/30/2007

Judges

• FLAUM, Circuit Judge., Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and FLAUM and SYKES, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Jeffrey McReynolds, Greenville, IL, pro se.


• For Appellees:
  
• Jeffrey M. Anderson (submitted), Peter M. Jarosz (argued), Office of the United States Attorney, Madison, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Jeffrey M. Brandt (argued), Robinson Brandt Law Offices, Cincinnati, OH, Thomas Peters (argued), Chicago, IL, Joy Bertrand, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.