Paul Hastings Secures Supreme Court Victory in Important Sentencing Case
Washington, DC - Paul Hastings, a leading global law firm, announced today that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of firm client Marvin Peugh in an important constitutional case concerning criminal sentencing in the federal courts.
In Peugh v. United States, No. 12-62, the Supreme Court held that the Ex Post Facto Clause prohibited the retroactive application of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines that increase the recommended sentencing range, even though those Guideline ranges are advisory. The Ex Post Facto Clause prohibits applying laws that create a significant risk of greater punishment to offenses committed before the enactment of the law. The Supreme Court held that a change in the applicable Guideline range is a change in law, and “[a] retrospective increase in the Guidelines range applicable to a defendant creates a sufficient risk of a higher sentence to constitute an ex post facto violation.”
“This is an important constitutional decision,” said
Kinnaird also argued and won an important constitutional case in 2010, Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010), which held that the Sixth Amendment entitled criminal defendants to competent advice of counsel regarding the deportation consequences of guilty pleas. Paul Hastings partnered with the University of Pennsylvania Law School Supreme Clinic and Allan Ackermann in representing Mr. Peugh.
Please find the opinion here: