United States v. Williams ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    v. Criminal No. 09-0026 (PLF)
    RICO RODRIGUS WILLIAl\/IS,
    Defendant.
    l\/IEl\/IORANDUl\/l OPINION AND ORDER
    This matter is before the Court on defendant Rico Williams’ l\/lotion to Vacate,
    Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Dkt. No. 254], and the
    government’s response to the motion [Dkt. No. 257]. For the reasons that follow, the Court will
    grant the defendant’s motion in part and deny it in part.
    On June 15, 2017, l\/lr. Williams pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter in
    violation of 18 U.S.C. § lllZ(a) [Dkt. No. 237]. He had previously been convicted by ajury of
    obstruction of justice/tampering with a witness, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § lSlZ(b)(3). The plea
    agreement stated that the maximum penalty for involuntary manslaughter was eight years. The
    Court sentenced l\/lr. Williams to eight years (that is, 96 months) in prison on the manslaughter
    charge and 96 months on the obstruction charge, the sentences to run concurrently. ln his
    motion, the defendant now points out that all parties - l\/lr. Williams, his lawyers, the
    government, the Probation Office, and the Court - overlooked the fact that at the time of the
    offense in July 2005, the maximum statutory penalty for involuntary manslaughter under
    18 U.S.C. § lllZ(a) was six years, not eight years. M Defendant’s l\/lotion at 2. (The statute
    was amended in 2008 to increase the penalty to eight years’ imprisonment.) The defendant
    therefore asks the Court to reduce the manslaughter conviction from eight years (or 96 months)
    to 72 months because the earlier sentence exceeded the statutory maximum. He also asks the
    Court to reduce the sentence for the obstruction count to 72 months and to again make the
    sentences concurrent
    The government does not oppose the defendant’s request to have the Court correct
    the sentence imposed on the manslaughter charge, as the 96 month-sentence for manslaughter
    exceeded the applicable statutory maximum of six years. As for the defendant’s second request
    - to reduce the sentence on the witness tampering/obstruction count from 96 months to 72
    months -the government defers to the Court as to whether it wishes to enter an amended and
    corrected judgment as to both counts. § Gov’t Response at 2-3.
    On this second question, the parties agree that the Court has discretion under
    Section 2255 to fashion “an appropriate remedy,” se_e Unilcd -Slales v. Pearce, 
    146 F.3d 771
    , 775
    (10th Cir. 1998), and to “resentence on all counts as may appear appropriate,” §§ Uniied S'lales
    v. 'l``ownsend, 
    178 F.3d 558
    , 566-67 (D.C. Cir. 1999). The government, also citing Pearce, notes
    that resentencing on the unaffected count is neither “required nor appropriate” in all cases. Gov’t
    Response at 1 (quoting LlLt<-:d Statcs v. 
    l’carcc, 146 F.3d at 775
    ). lt points out that the maximum
    statutory sentence for the obstruction charge under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3) was ten years at the
    time of the offense; the Guidelines sentencing range for that offense was 41 to 51 months. w
    Gov’t Response at 2.
    The Court will reduce the defendant’s sentence for manslaughter under 18 U.S.C.
    § l 1 12(a) from 96 months to 72 months, the statutory maximum. Based on the evidence
    presented at trial concerning the defendant’s conduct with respect to the witness
    tampering/obstruction of justice charge, the Court sees no reason to reduce the 96
    month-sentence on that count any further.l As noted, the statutory maximum was ten years, and
    the Court sentenced the defendant below that maximum. For these reasons, the Court will grant
    the defendant’s motion in part and deny it in part. lt will enter an amended judgment sentencing
    the defendant to 72 months on his plea to manslaughter under 18 U.S.C. § 1112(a), and 96
    months on his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3), the sentences to run concurrently.
    Accordingly, it is hereby
    ORDERED that the defendant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence
    Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Dkt. No. 254] is GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART;
    it is
    FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant’s sentence on his plea to involuntary
    manslaughter under 18 U.S.C. § 1112(a) is reduced from 96 months to 72 months; his sentence
    under 18 U.S.C. § l512(b)(3) remains unchanged; and it is
    FURTHER ORDERED that all other terms of the Amended Judgment entered on
    June 16, 2017 shall remain the same. A second Amended Judgment will be entered this same
    day.
    SO ORDERED.
    621 ;%l;.a.>
    P_AU_L ITERIEDMAN
    United States District Judge
    DATE; /,1|\\\‘7
    1 The defendant has served the entire 96-month sentence.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: Criminal No. 2009-0026

Judges: Judge Paul L. Friedman

Filed Date: 12/21/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2018