United States v. Duffey

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · August 19, 2025 · No. 22-10265

Summary

This Fifth Circuit per curiam opinion addresses a case remanded by the Supreme Court concerning the applicability of § 403 of the First Step Act to defendants facing resentencing after their prior sentences were vacated. Following the Supreme Court's ruling in Hewitt v. United States, which held that the Act's lenient penalties apply to all first-time § 924(c) offenders sentenced after the Act's enactment, the Fifth Circuit vacates the appellants' sentences. The court remands the case to the district court for resentencing consistent with the Supreme Court's decision and the unaffected portions of its prior opinion.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Southwick; Engelhardt; Wilson
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decision date
August 19, 2025
Docket number
22-10265
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas; remand from the Supreme Court of the United States
Precedential value
published
Parties
Corey Deyon Duffey; Jarvis Dupree Ross; Tony R. Hewitt v. United States of America
Disposition
remanded

Topics

sentencingstatutory interpretationpost-conviction reliefcriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether §403(b) of the First Step Act applies to defendants resentenced after vacatur of their pre‑Act sentences
  2. Whether the district court had jurisdiction to vacate §924(c) convictions based on the substantive crime of bank robbery

Holdings

  1. All first‑time §924(c) offenders resentenced after the First Step Act’s enactment date, including those whose prior sentences were vacated, are subject to the Act’s revised, more lenient penalties.
  2. The district court lacked jurisdiction to vacate those convictions.
  3. The Fifth Circuit vacates the appellants’ sentences and remands for resentencing consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion and the unaffected portions of the prior Fifth Circuit opinion.

Key quotations

The Court has now held that “all first-time [18 U.S.C.] § 924(c) offenders who appear for sentencing after the First Step Act’s enactment date—including those whose previous § 924(c) sentences have been vacated and who thus need to be resentenced—are subject to the Act’s revised penalties.” (at 2179)

Factual background

Defendants Corey Deyon Duffey, Jarvis Dupree Ross, and Tony R. Hewitt were resentenced after their pre‑Act sentences were vacated. The district court applied a physical‑restraint sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. §2B3.1(b)(4)(B) and attempted to vacate five §924(c) convictions. The issue turned on whether the First Step Act’s §403(b) applies to such post‑Act resentencings.

Procedural history

The Fifth Circuit previously held that §403(b) of the First Step Act did not apply to post‑enactment resentencings of defendants whose pre‑enactment sentences were vacated and affirmed the district court's sentencing enhancements. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, held that the Act’s revised penalties apply to all first‑time §924(c) offenders resentenced after the Act’s enactment, and reversed the Fifth Circuit’s judgment.

Remand instructions

Resentence the appellants consistent with the Supreme Court’s interpretation of §403(b) of the First Step Act and the portions of the Fifth Circuit’s prior opinion that were not affected by the reversal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…