By: Derek Hawkins//December 12, 2016//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: United States of America v. Marcus Harris
Case No.: 16-1023
Officials: FLAUM and KANNE, Circuit Judges, and MAGNUS‐ STINSON, District Judge.*
Focus: Sentencing Guidelines – Procedural Error
Marcus Harris commit‐ ted three armed robberies in 2013, two in Indiana and one in Illinois. He was arrested and charged in state court for one of the Indiana robberies. While the Indiana case was pending, federal authorities sent Harris a target letter concerning the Illinois robbery. Harris requested and was appointed a federal public defender, but his federal public defender failed to ad‐ vise Harris or his state defense attorney of the progress of the federal proceedings before his guilty plea and sentencing in Indiana state court. He was later charged by federal indictment and pled guilty in federal court to the Illinois robbery, and stipulated to the uncharged Indiana robbery as relevant offense conduct. At his federal sentencing, the parties agreed that Harris’ federal public defender’s failure to update him about the federal proceedings prejudiced Harris because had he not been convicted in state court, and had all of the robberies been charged in one federal proceeding, his sentencing guideline range in his federal court case would have been lower. The parties agreed to a hypothetical guideline range to compensate for the federal public defender’s error. Harris claims that the district court committed procedural error when it failed to accept the hypothetical guideline range or to explain why it rejected it. We disagree and affirm his sentence.
Affirmed