Podcast appearances and mentions of Terry V United

Federal Criminal Statutes. Experts discuss the Court's refusal to read statutes broadly and the importance of judges considering the impacts of race and addiction in sentencing. Participants. Laurie L. Levenson, Professor, Loyola Law School; Evan Lee, Professor Emeritus, UC Hastings College of Law; and Jim Chance, Senior Judicial Education Attorney, Federal Judicial Center.

Federal Criminal Statutes. Experts discuss the Court's refusal to read statutes broadly and the importance of judges considering the impacts of race and addiction in sentencing. Participants. Laurie L. Levenson, Professor, Loyola Law School; Evan Lee, Professor Emeritus, UC Hastings College of Law; and Jim Chance, Senior Judicial Education Attorney, Federal Judicial Center.

On June 14th, 2021, the Supreme Court decided Terry v. U.S. The issue before the Court was whether pre-August 3rd, 2010, crack offenders sentenced under 21 U.S.C 841(b)(1)(c) have a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Roberts, Breyer, Alito, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joined. We are joined today by Vikrant P. Reddy, Senior Research Fellow at the Charles Koch Institute.

Terry v United States (2021) was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with retroactive changes to prison sentences for drug-possession crimes related to the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, its retroactive nature established by the First Step Act of 2018. In a unanimous judgement, the Court ruled that while the First Step Act does allow for retroactive considerations of sentence reductions for drug-possession crimes prior to 2010, this only covers those that were sentenced under minimum sentencing requirements. Background. Prior to 2010, the United States had strict federal laws related to drug possession under 21 U.S.C. § 841, which established a three-tier penalty system depending on the among and type of drug, a response due to the crack epidemic of the 1980s. For crack cocaine, tier 1 crimes carried a ten-year mandatory minimum sentence for possessing more than 50 grams (1.8 oz), tier 2 crimes carried a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for more than 5 grams (0.18 oz), and tier 3 crimes did not have any mandatory sentence for amounts less than 5 g. Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act in 2010 which altered the possession levels for crack cocaine to higher levels as to bring these in line with the possession levels established for powder cocaine. For example, the tier 2 possession level was increased to 28 grams (0.99 oz) of crack cocaine. Later, in 2018, the First Step Act was passed that, among other provisions, allowed those sentenced on drug-possession charges prior to the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act's altered levels to seek resentencing. Tarahrick Terry had been charged with possession of 4 grams (0.14 oz) of crack cocaine in 2008, treated as a tier 3 violation, and was sentenced to 15 years in prison. Terry sought a resentencing hearing after the passage of the Fair Sentencing Act but was denied by both the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and on appeal at the Eleventh Circuit as his drug possession had been determined to be an act of recidivism. Following passage of the First Step Act, Terry again sought a resentencing hearing, arguing his possession fell under the retroactive considerations of this new act. Again, both the District Court and Eleventh Circuit ruled against this, stating that Terry's possession charge as a tier 3 act was not a covered crime under the First Step Act. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

On June 14, 2021, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Terry v. United States. Petitioner Tarahrick Terry plead guilty to possession of crack cocaine in 2008. Following the passage of the First Step Act in 2018, petitioner requested resentencing. The First Step Act makes the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act's downward sentence modification for certain crack cocaine convictions retroactive. The Court found that since Terry's initial crack cocaine conviction did not trigger a mandatory minimum, it was not modified by the Fair Sentencing Act. As a result, the First Step Act does not apply and Terry's request for retroactive resentencing was properly denied. Featuring: -- Vikrant P. Reddy, Senior Research Fellow, Charles Koch Institute

Over-Regulation Strangles CA's Retail Marijuana Sector  In this episode, Vec discusses the subsidy of California's legal pot market because of over-regulation.  The California Legislature recently approved a $100-million plan to bolster the state's legal marijuana industry, which continues to struggle to compete with the large illicit pot market nearly five years after voters approved sales for recreational use. California's legal recreational marijuana industry is so heavily taxed and regulated that the black market still dominates. Many cannabis growers, retailers, and manufacturers have struggled to make the transition from a provisional, temporary license to a permanent one renewed on an annual basis—a process that requires a costly, complicated, and time-consuming review of the negative environmental effects involved in a business and a plan for reducing those harms. SCOTUS Ruling on First Step Act  Later in the episode, Vec talks about Terry v. United States and the Supreme Court's textualist, unanimous ruling on the First Step Act. In Terry v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that people convicted of certain low-level crack cocaine offenses are not eligible for sentencing reductions under the First Step Act, a 2018 law that made some criminal-justice reforms retroactive. Tarahrick Terry pleaded guilty in 2008 to possession with intent to distribute approximately 4 grams of crack cocaine. He was sentenced to nearly 16 years in prison. In 2010, Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act, which reduced the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. In 2018, Congress passed the First Step Act, which made certain provisions of the Fair Sentencing Act retroactive and allowed some people convicted under the old regime to seek reduced sentences. Terry argued that he was entitled under the First Step Act to seek a sentencing reduction. The Court found that since Terry's initial crack cocaine conviction did not trigger a mandatory minimum, it was not modified by the Fair Sentencing Act. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Debriefing the Law, Daily Update | June 15th, 2021 In today's update, Joel reviews yesterday's Supreme Court decisions: Terry v. United States and Greer v. United States. In Terry v. U.S., the Court discusses a Congressional mistake on how cocaine law has been ruled on previously. Apparently, there were different sentencing for crack cocaine versus powder cocaine. In Greer v. U.S., the Court rules on the timeline a lawyer has to bring up any trial mistakes.  Stay tuned for more updates as the Supreme Court still has many major decisions coming out this month!

Melissa, Kate, and Leah break down the recent cert grants, the oral argument in Terry v. United States, and the opinions in Edwards v. Vannoy, CIC v. IRS, Caniglia v. Strom, & BP v. Baltimore. They then workshop their reviews of Justice Breyer’s forthcoming book before highlighting some exciting Supreme Court-related book reviews.

On May 4, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Terry v. United States. The question before the court was whether pre-August 3, 2010, crack offenders sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) have a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act. Vikrant Reddy, Senior Reserch Fellow at the Charles Koch Institute, joins us today to discuss this case's oral argument.

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether pre-August 3, 2010, crack offenders sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) have a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act.DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)Sep 28 2020 | Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 4, 2020)Oct 28 2020 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 4, 2020 to December 4, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.Oct 29 2020 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 4, 2020.Dec 04 2020 | Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed. (Distributed)Dec 07 2020 | Letter waiving the 14-day waiting period for the distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 15.5. filed.Dec 09 2020 | Reply of petitioner Tarahrick Terry filed. (Distributed)Dec 10 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.Jan 08 2021 | Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED.Jan 28 2021 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Tarahrick Terry.Jan 28 2021 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Tarahrick TerryFeb 12 2021 | Brief of petitioner Tarahrick Terry filed.Feb 19 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.Feb 19 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Americans for Prosperity Foundation filed.Feb 19 2021 | Brief amici curiae of American Conservative Union & ACU Foundation, et al. filed.Feb 19 2021 | Brief amici curiae of District of Columbia, et al. filed.Feb 19 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Senators Richard J. Durbin, et al. filed.Feb 19 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Retired Federal Judges, Former Federal Prosecutors, et al. filed.Feb 19 2021 | Brief amici curiae of ACLU, et al. filed.Feb 22 2021 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.Mar 12 2021 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, April 20, 2021.Mar 15 2021 | Letter of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)Mar 15 2021 | Letter of petitioner Tarahrick Terry filed. (Distributed)Mar 15 2021 | Record requested.Mar 15 2021 | The record from the U.S.C.A. 11th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.Mar 17 2021 | The record from the U.S.D.C. Southern Dist. of Florida is electronic and located on Pacer.Mar 19 2021 | The case is removed from the calendar for the March 2021 argument session. Adam K. Mortara, Esquire, of Chicago, Illinois, is invited to brief and argue, as amicus curiae, in support of the judgment below. The case will be rescheduled for argument this Term.Mar 25 2021 | The brief of the Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of the judgment below, and any other briefs of amicus curiae in support, are to be filed on or before Tuesday, April 13, 2021. Any reply brief is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Wednesday, April 28, 2021. The case is set for oral argument on Tuesday, May 4, 2021.Mar 25 2021 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, May 4, 2021.Mar 30 2021 | CIRCULATEDMar 31 2021 | Motion for leave to file a brief out of time filed by respondent.Mar 31 2021 | Motion for divided argument filed by respondent in support of reversal.Apr 05 2021 | Motion of respondent for leave to file a brief out of time GRANTED.Apr 05 2021 | Motion for divided argument filed by respondent GRANTED.Apr 13 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of the judgment below filed. (Distributed)Apr 27 2021 | Reply of petitioner Tarahrick Terry filed. (Distributed)Apr 28 2021 | Reply of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)May 04 2021 | Argued. For petitioner: Andrew L. Adler, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. For respondent: Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of the judgment below: Adam K. Mortara, Chicago, Ill.★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Buckle up, because this week we're talking crack cocaine, online dating, and positive aspects of Donald Trump's presidency.  This week's case is Terry v. United States, which asks whether the Supreme Court can amend a poorly-written statute on mass incarceration.  Law starts at (07:25).

The Supreme Court heard its last argument of the term—and perhaps the last of Justice Stephen Breyer’s tenure—in a crack-cocaine sentencing case May 4. D.C. Solicitor General Loren Alikhan, who filed a brief supporting the defense, joins Cases and Controversies to break down the dispute in Terry v. United States over whether low-level crack offenders can get relief under the First Step Act. Judging from the argument, it sounds like the court will say no, even though the Justice Department switched positions after the 2020 election to side with the defendant, Tarahrick Terry. Hosts Kimberly Robinson and Jordan Rubin also speculate about the latest in Breyer Watch—will he retire? when?—and give some statistics on when other justices have announced their plans to step down.

Thirteen years ago, Tarahrick Terry was charged with possession with intent to distribute 3.9 grams of cocaine base otherwise known as crack cocaine. He pled guilty and was sentenced under 21 U.S.C. 842(b)(1)(C) which set a range of 0-30 years. Terry received a sixteen-year term of imprisonment followed by six months of supervised release. Congress passed comprehensive criminal justice reform twice in the years following: the Fair Sentencing Act (2010) and the First Step Act (2018) which modified the application of the Fair Sentencing Act. Terry appealed his sentence, arguing his offense was a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act. The district court denied relief and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.On May 4, 2021, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument taking up the question whether Terry’s offense was a “covered offense” under Section 404 under the First Step Act and whether he is entitled to relief.Featuring:-- Vikrant Reddy, Senior Research Fellow, Charles Koch Institute

Terry v. United States | 05/04/21 | Docket #: 20-5904

Terry v. United States

A case in which the Court held that pre-August 3, 2010, crack offenders sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) do not have a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act and thus are not eligible for sentence reduction.

A case in which the Court will decide whether pre-August 3, 2010, crack offenders sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) have a “covered offense” under Section 404 of the First Step Act.