United States Seventh Circuit

In challenges by two co-defendants to their convictions on drug-distribution charges, and by one defendant to his sentence, convictions are affirmed and sentence vacated and remanded where: 1) a case agent's testimony was properly admitted as lay opinion testimony rather than expert testimony; 2) there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions; 3) there was no violation of the Speedy Trial Act; 4) the testimony of two witnesses was properly admitted over hearsay and other-crimes objections; 5) an offense-level increase for possession of a firearm was correctly applied; 6) drug quantity was properly proven and calculated during sentencing; 7) the sentencing court took into account the advisory nature of the sentencing guidelines; but 8) resentencing was necessary in light of the advisory nature of the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity.

Appellate Information

• Argued 04/14/2008
• Decided 09/15/2008
• Published 09/15/2008

Judges

• TINDER, Circuit Judge., Before FLAUM, EVANS, and TINDER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• J. Christopher Moore (argued), Office of the United States Attorney, Criminal Division, Fairview Heights, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee., William D. Stiehl, Jr. (argued), Wimmer & Stiehl, Belleville, IL, for Defendant-Appellant Rollins., Thomas P. Deaton, Jr. (argued), St. Louis, MO, for Defendant-Appellant Slack.