Motion to Withdraw Granted
In US v. Diaz, No. 10-317, proceedings involving a motion for permission to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), on the ground that defendant was not entitled to the benefit of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, the court granted the motion where defendant was sentenced before the effective date of the Act, and the Act was not retroactive.
As the court wrote: "Yuanchung Lee, counsel for Appellant, moves for permission to withdraw as counsel pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and the Government moves for summary affirmance of an order of the district court (Buchwald, J.) denying Appellant's motion for a reduction to his sentence. The Government argues, inter alia, that the district court's denial of Appellant's motion for a reduction to his sentence should be affirmed because the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 ("FSA"), which reduces the disparity between crack and powder cocaine, is not retroactive, and therefore, could not operate to reduce Appellant's sentence, since he was convicted and sentenced before the FSA was signed into law."
Related Resources
- Read the Second Circuit's Decision in US v. Diaz, No. 10-317