Showing 1 - 4 of 4 results
United States v. Curry, No. 1:05CR282-TDS, 2021 WL 2644298 (M.D.N.C. June 25, 2021)
Motion to Extend Time to File Reply Brief
Motion to File Reply Brief in Excess of Word Limit
Reply (April 10, 2021)
Order (June 25, 2021)
Argument: Mr. Curry was originally sentenced to life in prison in 2006 after a jury convicted of multiple drug counts and convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). After two resentencings, Mr. Curry was still subject to a 41 ½ year sentence, driven primarily by two stacked § 924(c) convictions in his case. His release date was projected as 2041 when Mr. Curry would be 65 years old. Judge had previously denied pre-McCoy.
Post McCoy, volunteers with NACDL's Excessive Sentence Project filed a CR Reply (gov. had already responded to pro se motion) arguing that First Step Act’s changes to the § 924(c) stacking penalty would result in Mr. Curry receiving a much lower sentence today for the same convictions. Court granted motion, citing the “gross disparity” between the sentence Mr. Curry originally received and the sentence he would receive today along with his extensive rehabilitation while incarcerated. The district court reduced Mr. Curry’s sentence from 500 months to 240 months. Release date will now be 2022.
Brown v. Delhaize America, LLC, and Food Lion, LLC,
Brief Amici Curiae of the National Consumer Law Center, Demos, The National Association of Consumer Advocates, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the National Employment Law Project, and the Southern Coalition for Social Justice.
Argument: Fair and accurate reporting of criminal record information is essential to protecting individuals’ rights and opportunities. Background checks contain a high rate of errors with deleterious impacts on consumers. Creation of a Sec. 1681(a)(y) exclusion would remove nearly all FCRA protections from employment criminal records reports. Judicial enactment of a § 1681a(y) FCRA exclusion for every circumstance in which the employer has a “policy against employing those with certain criminal histories” – every employer who uses a criminal background check – would swallow the rule itself.