2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-5-2005 

# U SA v . Go o dm an P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-1651

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . Goodm a n" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 169. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/169NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL I N TH E UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS

F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

_______________ N o. 04- 1651

________________ UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. J AM AL GOODMAN,

Appel l ant

________________________________ O n A p p ea l Fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt F o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . N o. 02- cr - 00643- 1) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e Ti m ot hyJ . Savage

_______________________________________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a) N ovember15, 2005 B e f o re : R O T H , F U E N T E S a n d B E C K E R , C i r cui tJudges

( Fi l ed D ece m ber5, 2005)

_______________________

OP I NI ON

_______________________ B E C K E R , C i r cui tJudge . Ja m a l G o o d m a n , p ro se , ap p e a ls f ro m a ju d g m e n t ag a in st h im in a c rim in a l ca se in w hi ch he w as convi ct ed, fol l ow i ng a tw o- dayj ur yt r i al , on s even c ount s of drug and gun char ges . G oodm an es s ent i al l yr ai s es fourcl ai m s goi ng t o t he mer i t s of the convi ct i on and2

one goi ng t o t he s ent ence . O ne of thes e fourcl ai m s i s t hatof i neff ect i ve as s i s t ance of c o u n s e l w h ic h , in a c c o rd a n c e w ith o u r p re c e d e n t, w e d e c lin e to a d d re s s o n d ir e c t a p p e a l. See M as s ar o v. U

ni t ed Stat es , 5 3 8 U .S . 5 0 0 (2 0 0 3 ); U ni t ed Stat es v. Thornton , 327 F. 3d 2 6 8 , 2 7 1 -7 2 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 3 ); U ni t ed Stat es v. Jake , 2 8 1 F .3 d 1 2 3 , 1 3 2 n .7 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). T h e o th e r t h re e c o n v ic tio n -r e la te d c la im s a re p la in ly la c k in g in m e ri t. Fi r s t , t he cont ent i on t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d nothave j ur i s di ct i on t o cons i dert he fede r al offe ns es w i t h w hi ch G oodm an w as char ged i s bas el es s . T he i ndi ctm entchar ged fede r al cr i m i nal l aw vi ol at i ons of 21 U . S. C . §§ 841( a) , 846 and 860. A ccor di ng t o 18 U . S. C . § 3231, “The di s t r i ctcour t s of the U ni t ed St at es s hal l have or i gi nal j ur i s di ct i on, excl us i ve of the court s of the St at es , of al l offe ns es agai ns tt he l aw s of the U ni t ed St at es . ” Second, t he ar gum entt hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tdeni ed G oodm an hi s r i ghtof s el fre p re se n tatio n a t se n ten c in g a n d th u s v io late d h is S ix th A m e n d m e n t rig h ts is p lain ly lack ing in m erit . B ec au se G o o d m an n ev er c learlyan d u n eq u ivo ca ll yex p resse d a d esire t o r epr es enthi m s el f thr oughoutt he s ent enci ng pr ocee di ng, t he D i s t r i ctC our tw as not r equi r ed t o conducta col l oquypur s uantt o Fa re tta v . C a lif o rn ia , 4 2 2 U .S . 8 0 6 (1 9 7 5 ). T hi r d, vi ew i ng t he evi dence i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he governm ent , i ti s cl eart hat G oo dm an’s cl ai m t hat the D i stri ctC ou rterr ed w hen i tden i ed h i s R ule 29 m oti on m ust fai l . Fort he for egoi ng r eas ons , t he j udgm entof convi ct i on w i l l be af fi r m ed. T u rnin g to the sen tenc e, w e n o te th at tw o p o ints w ere ad d ed to G o o d m an ’s G ui del i nes s cor e pur s uantt o U . S. S. G . § 3B 1. 1( c) beca us e the C our tfound thatG oodm an3

w as a m an ag er o f th e c ri m inal ac ti v ity . G o o d m an ch all en g es th e se n tenc e u n d er U ni t ed St at es v. B ooker , 1 2 5 S . C t . 7 3 8 ( 2 0 0 5 ) , i n a s m u c h a s t h e s e f i n d i n g s w e r e n o tm a d e b y a j ur yoradmi t t ed byt he def endant . H avi ng det erm i ned thatt he s ent enci ng i s s ues t hat G o o d m a n ra ise s a re b e st d e ter m in e d b yth e D istric t C o u rt in th e f irst in sta n c e , w e w ill vaca t e the s ent ence and r emand forr es ent enci ng i n acc or dance w i t h B ooker . See U ni t ed S ta tes v . D a v is , 4 0 7 F . 3 d 1 6 2 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ( en banc ).