第五巡回法院复议毒品案上诉：驳回动议随案移交实体审理
新奥尔良—美国联邦第五巡回上诉法院11月7日公布一项已发布的命令：毒品案被告杰拉德·巴雷特（Jerad M. Barrett）在认罪协议中放弃上诉权后仍提出上诉，法院合议庭此前已批准政府的驳回动议；巴雷特随后提出无人反对的复议动议，合议庭此次批准复议，并裁定政府的驳回动议随案移交实体审理合议庭一并考虑，全案继续审理。
这项命令于10月28日归档，由格雷夫斯（Graves）、何俊宇（James C. Ho）与道格拉斯（Douglas）三位巡回法官组成的合议庭以全体一致方式作出。何俊宇法官另附异议意见：他同意驳回上诉本应获准，认为巴雷特的情况达不到联邦最高法院在 Hunter v. United States 案中确立的「司法不公」例外的高门槛，合议庭把驳回动议随案移交、推迟裁决并不妥当。
案情源于路易斯安那州东区联邦地区法院的一起毒品案。巴雷特与政府达成认罪协议，政府同意以修订后的起诉书取代原起诉书，删除涉及量刑严厉、可至终身监禁的甲基苯丙胺内容；巴雷特则对四项毒品罪名认罪，这些罪名法定最高刑为20年，并同意除刑期超过法定最高刑或主张辩护律师无效协助外放弃上诉。
量刑时，地区法院采纳了联邦缓刑署量刑前调查报告的建议，把与甲基苯丙胺相关的数量计入刑级计算，并以巴雷特涉嫌「广泛的」毒品活动为由作了领导角色加重，量刑区间由此从46至57个月升至135至168个月；法院最终在区间内判处135个月监禁，约11年。
巴雷特上诉主张三点：量刑时不应计入认罪协商中已删除的甲基苯丙胺相关行为；领导角色加重所依据的信息不可靠、对量刑指南的理解有误；法院拒绝向下偏离量刑时依据了「没有支持的假设」。他主张这些错误若在执行其上诉放弃条款的情况下仍然成立，将构成司法不公。
异议意见指出，Hunter 案所指的错误是超出法定最高刑、以种族等违宪因素量刑、或不给被告任何听审机会这类「明显而严重」的错误；量刑指南的计算与适用问题属于量刑这一「复杂事务」中「不幸但不可避免的错误」，不构成司法不公。何俊宇法官据此认为应立即批准政府的驳回动议，而不是随案移交。
随着复议获准、驳回动议随案移交，巴雷特的上诉将由实体审理合议庭连同政府的驳回动议一并审理，案件后续进展仍待法院裁定。
（来源：美国联邦第五巡回上诉法院）
Fifth Circuit Reconsiders Drug Appeal, Carries Government Dismissal Motion With the Case
NEW ORLEANS - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on November 7 released a published order in the drug case of Jerad M. Barrett: a panel that had previously granted the government's motion to dismiss Barrett's appeal, after he appealed despite waiving his appellate rights in a plea agreement, has now granted his unopposed motion for reconsideration and ordered that the government's motion to dismiss be carried with the case for consideration by a merits panel.
The order, filed October 28, was issued per curiam by a panel of Circuit Judges Graves, Ho and Douglas. Judge James C. Ho filed a dissent: he agreed the appeal should be dismissed, arguing Barrett's case does not meet the high bar of the miscarriage-of-justice exception recognized by the Supreme Court in Hunter v. United States, and that carrying the motion with the case improperly delays the decision.
The case began in the Eastern District of Louisiana. Barrett entered a plea agreement under which the government superseded the original indictment and removed references to methamphetamine that carried severe maximum sentences, including up to life imprisonment; Barrett pleaded guilty to four drug offenses carrying statutory maximums of 20 years, and agreed not to appeal unless he was sentenced in excess of the statutory maximum or wished to raise ineffective-assistance claims.
At sentencing, the district court adopted the presentence report prepared by U.S. Probation, which considered the methamphetamine in its offense-level calculation and included a leadership enhancement based on Barrett's allegedly extensive drug activity. Those considerations raised the guideline range from 46 to 57 months to 135 to 168 months, and the court imposed a within-guidelines sentence of 135 months, about 11 years.
On appeal, Barrett faulted the district court on three grounds: considering methamphetamine-related conduct that had been dropped as part of the plea negotiations; relying on unreliable information and misinterpreting the Sentencing Guidelines in imposing the leadership enhancement; and relying on unsupported assumptions in denying a downward variance. He argued that enforcing his appeal waiver in the face of those errors would result in a miscarriage of justice.
The dissent said the errors contemplated by Hunter are the obvious and egregious kind, such as a sentence exceeding the statutory maximum, a sentence based on a constitutionally impermissible factor such as race, or a sentence imposed without any hearing at all. Errors in calculating and applying the Guidelines, it said, are the unfortunate but inevitable mistakes of the complex affair of sentencing and do not constitute a miscarriage of justice. Judge Ho would have granted the government's motion to dismiss now rather than carry it with the case.
With reconsideration granted and the dismissal motion carried with the case, Barrett's appeal will now be considered by a merits panel together with the government's motion. Further proceedings remain pending before the court.
(Source: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit)
来源：美国联邦第五巡回上诉法院
发布：GSM·美国（发布链接）
图片来源：图：位于新奥尔良的美国联邦第五巡回上诉法院约翰·迈纳·威斯登大楼。图片来源：美国国会图书馆／Wikimedia Commons，公共领域。 / Photo: The John Minor Wisdom U.S. Court of Appeals Building in New Orleans, home of the Fifth Circuit. Photo: Library of Congress via Wikimedia Commons, public domain.
GSM Global · 本篇英文版 English edition of this story
