Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Hudson, 09-3680

By FindLaw Staff on December 06, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Sentencing challenge in drug and firearm related conviction

US v. Hudson, 09-3680, concerned a challenge to the district court's imposition of a statutory mandatory minimum of 120-month sentence for a drug charge and to 60 months' imprisonment for gun possession in furtherance of drug dealing, to be served consecutively, in a conviction of defendant for drug and firearm related offenses.

In affirming, the court held that defendant's argument, that section 924(c)(1)(A) only imposes a mandatory consecutive sentence if the underlying crime does not impose a greater mandatory minimum sentence, has been rejected by the Supreme Court in Abott v. United States, 131 S. Ct. (2010), which held that section 924(c)(1)(A)'a "except" clause only applies when the minimum sentence "otherwise provided" is "for the section 924(c) offense in question."

Related Link:

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard