Law School Case Brief
Glover v. United States - 531 U.S. 198, 121 S. Ct. 696 (2001)
In some circumstances a mere difference in outcome will not suffice to establish Strickland prejudice.
Defendant was convicted for labor racketeering, money laundering, and tax evasion. The government objected to the recommendation that his convictions be grouped together under the US Sentencing Manual. Subsequently, defendant moved to correct his sentence contending that the failure of his counsel to press the grouping issue was ineffective assistance. The district court denied the motion, the judgment of which was affirmed on appeal.
Does the increase in defendant’s sentence serve as bar to showing prejudice?
The United States Supreme Court reversed the judgment denying petitioner's motion to correct his sentence. Although the amount by which petitioner's sentence was increased by the district court's decision not to group the money laundering counts could be a factor to consider in determining whether counsel's performance in failing to argue the point constituted ineffective assistance, it could not serve as a bar to a showing of prejudice.
Access the full text case
Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
Be Sure You're Prepared for Class