Sentencing Guidelines-Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Deon Evans

Case No.: 22-1195

Officials: Wood, Brennan, and Scudder, Circuit Judges

Focus: Sentencing Guidelines-Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Evans engaged in two separate heroin sales to a confidential source, one involving 50 grams and the other 125 grams. After the second sale, law enforcement stopped Evans within half an hour and discovered cash from the controlled purchase, methamphetamine, two handguns, and ammunition. As a result of these findings, he faced charges for two drug distribution offenses under 21 U.S.C. 841, as well as two firearm charges under 18 U.S.C. 924(c) and 922(g)(1). Due to conflicts with his initial attorneys, Sarm was appointed to represent Evans. Following the withdrawal of Evans’s plea, prosecutors added an additional 924(c) count.

During the trial, Sarm only subjected four out of 11 witnesses to meaningful cross-examination and decided not to present any evidence or call defense witnesses. As a consequence, Evans was found guilty and sentenced to a lengthy prison term of 788 months. A significant portion of his sentence, 50 years, stemmed from the 924(c) convictions, each carrying mandatory minimum, consecutive sentences of 25 years because Evans had a previous qualifying 924(c) conviction. Tragically, only nineteen days after the trial, Sarm passed away from a heroin overdose. A new counsel was appointed by the district court, but the motion for a new trial was denied without a hearing.

However, the Seventh Circuit intervened and vacated the decision. They argued that the evidence supported only one 924(c) conviction rather than two since Evans possessed the firearm over a continuous 30-minute span that included the heroin sale and the police’s discovery of methamphetamine and a gun in his car. Additionally, Evans faced serious charges with severe sentencing consequences, and his appointed counsel, who had no prior experience in federal criminal cases, was battling a heroin addiction during and after the trial. Consequently, the court ruled that Evans deserved an evidentiary hearing on his motion for a new trial.

Vacated and remanded

Decided 07/24/23

Full Text