Denial of Terrorism Enhancement on a Sentence Vacated, and Other Criminal Matter

Urinyi v. US, No. 09-3398, involved petitioner's motion for leave to file a "second or successive" motion to vacate his conviction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2255.  The court of appeals denied the petition, on the ground that petitioner's prior motion did not count when determining whether his proposed motion was "second or successive" under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, and thus petitioner did not require leave of the court to file the proposed motion in the district court.

In US v. Awan, No. 07-4315, the court of appeals vacated defendant's conspiracy to commit murder sentence, holding that the district court erred by denying the U.S.'s request for imposition of a terrorism enhancement, because the district court failed to consider application of the "intended to promote" prong of U.S.S.G. section 3A1.4 and misconstrued the "involved" prong.

Related Resources

• Full Text of Urinyi v. US, No. 09-3398
• Full Text of US v. Awan, No. 07-4315