Buford V, United States Essays - Buford V. United States

Buford V, United States Brief of BUFORD v. UNITED STATES Certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit No. 99-9073. Argued January 8, 2001--Decided March 20, 2001 TYPE OF CASE. This case has to deal with the certiorari (Latin for to be informed) from the United States Court of appeals for the seventh district. This case raises a question of the sentencing laws. What is the standard of review as it applies when a court of appeals reviews a trial courts Sentencing Guideline determination as to whether an offenders prior convictions were consolidated, hence related, for purposes of sentencing? In particular, should the appeals court review the trial courts decision deferentially or de novo? FACTS OF THE CASE The trial court decision at issue focused on one aspect of the United States Sentencing Guidelines' treatment of career offenders, a category of offender subject to particularly severe punishment. The Guidelines define a career offender as an offender with at least two prior felony convictions for violent or drug-related crimes. United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual ?4B1.1 (Nov. 2000) (USSG). Petitioner Buford pleaded guilty to armed bank robbery. At sentencing, the Government conceded that her four prior robbery convictions were related, but did not concede that her prior drug conviction was related to the robberies. The drug crime (possession of, with intent to deliver, cocaine) had taken place about the same time as the fourth robbery, and Buford claimed that the robberies had been motivated by her drug addiction. But the only evidentiary link among the crimes was that the police had discovered the cocaine when searching Buford's house after her arrest for the robberies. Moreover, no formal order of consolidation had been entered. The State had charged the drug offense in a separate indictment and had assigned a different prosecutor to handle the drug case. A different judge had heard Buford plead guilty to the drug charge in a different hearing held on a different date; two different state prosecutors had appeared before the sentencing court, one discussing drugs, the other discussing the robberies; and the sentencing court had entered two separate judgments. Petitioner Buford pointed out that the State had sent the four robbery cases for sentencing to the very same judge who had heard and accepted her plea of guilty to the drug charge; that the judge had heard arguments about sentencing in all five cases at the same time in a single proceeding; that the judge had issued sentences for all five crimes at the same time. The Court of Appeals found the functional consolidation question a close one, and wrote, The standard of appellate review may be disparities. 201 F. 3d, at 940. It decided to review the District Court's decision deferentially rather than de novo. Id., at 942. And it affirmed the trial courts sentencing. LEGAL ISSUE Should the Seventh Circuit Court consider the convictions of the robberies and drug charge sentence as consolidated for sentencing, and hence related, even if a sentencing court did not enter a formal consolidation order due to logically related and sentencing was joint. This case concerns functional consolidation. and decide whether Buford's five 1992 Wisconsin state-court convictions were related to one another, and consequently counted as one single prior conviction, or whether they should count as more than one thus allowing stricter sentencing guidelines. HOLDING AND DECISION The Seventh Circuit Court believed that the Appellate Court was right to review this trial court decision deferentially rather than de novo. The need for special competence of the district court helped to make deferential review appropriate. That is to say, the District Court is in a better position than the Appellate Court to decide whether a particular set of individual circumstances demonstrates functional consolidation. In addition, factual nuance may closely guide the legal decision, with legal results depending heavily upon an understanding of the significance of case-specific details. See Koon v. United States, supra, at 98-99 (District Court's detailed understanding of the case 2before it and experience with other sentencing cases favored deferential review); Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U. S. 384, 403-404 (1990) (fact-intensive nature of decision whether to impose sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 made deferential review

An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge essays

An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge essays What makes Ambrose Bierce a realist Author "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" can be considered a work of realism for two reasons. The first is Bierce's utilization of his own military background giving this story a sense of realism. Bierce also conveys his pessimism after leading the reader to believe otherwise. This story provides social critique of the south during the Civil War. Bierce goes to great lengths to describe the opening sequence in terms of its military arrangement. He provides brilliant images of group formations and soldier stances like "a single company of infantry in line, at 'parade rest' the butts of the rifles on the ground, the barrels inclining backward against the right shoulder, the hands crossed upon the stock". He also takes the time to describe exactly how fortified the Owl Creek Bridge is. He shows his military experience by describing a road that stretches out of site and assuming that "Doubtless there was an outpost farther along". The procedures of a military execution were explained thoroughly including the code of conduct: "In the code of military manners silence and fixity are forms of deference". Bierce earned the nickname "Bitter Bierce early in his life for his pessimism. This is not evident in this story until the end. The third and final part begins with a sequence of miraculous occurrences allowing Peyton Farquhar to es cape from his hanging. The description of these events leads the reader to believe that Bierce is a Romantic author rather than a realist. The rope breaks dropping him into the creek. He then uses his "superhuman strength to remove the rope from around his neck. Peyton is then blessed with better senses seeing the veins on leaves in the forest and hearing gnats and dragonfly wings in the distance. Then he sees the eye of a marksman on the bridge through the range on the rifle. Amazingly, this marksman misses what should be an easy target and allows Farquhar to...