UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RONALD HUNTER - Articles

All Content

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RONALD HUNTER

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Aug 30, 2021

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Andrew Goetz, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Laura Danielle Mazor, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEFENDER, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Andrew Goetz, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Laura Danielle Mazor, Benton Martin, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEFENDER, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Stephanie Franxman Kessler, PINALES STACHLER YOUNG & BURRELL CO., LPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, Michael L. Waldman, Courtney L. Millian, ROBBINS, RUSSELL, ENGLERT, ORSECK, UNTEREINER & SAUBER, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae.

Judge(s): GUY, GIBBONS, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

RALPH B. GUY, JR., Circuit Judge. Drug enterprise hitman Ronald Hunter was convicted by a federal jury of murdering a 23-year-old woman outside a nightclub. He was sentenced to life in prison. Twenty-one years later, a different judge granted Hunter’s motion for compassionate release. Based upon the fact that Hunter did not get the benefit of the non-retroactive decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), certain facts that existed at sentencing, and Hunter’s less-than-spotless rehabilitation efforts, the district court found that together these factors amounted to the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” required for a sentence reduction. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). The question is whether this was an abuse of discretion. We conclude that it was and reverse.

Attachments: