Santiago v. United States
- John Keenan
- 1:16-cv-04957
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Santiago v. United States, Judge Keenan granted the motion as described, vacated and dismissed Count Six, and imposed 11 years plus two years of supervised release.
Jose Santiago’s Count Six firearm conviction was vacated and dismissed; his 11-year prison sentence was maintained on the remaining counts, and his supervised-release term was set at two years.
What happened
In Santiago v. United States, Jose Santiago challenged his federal sentence under a law allowing a prisoner to ask the sentencing court to correct an unlawful sentence. He had pleaded guilty to conspiracy and four counts of Hobbs Act robbery, as well as using and brandishing a firearm during the robbery conspiracy.
The government agreed that a Supreme Court decision and a later appeals-court decision made Santiago’s firearm conviction legally invalid. The government and Santiago both agreed that the court should remove that conviction but keep the original 11-year prison sentence.
Judge John F. Keenan granted Santiago’s motion to the extent described in the order. The court vacated and dismissed Count Six, resentenced Santiago to 11 years in prison on the remaining counts, and imposed two years of supervised release. The order also provides for a possible $100 refund if Santiago had already paid the special assessment for Count Six.
The detailed version
- Santiago v. United States · No. 1:16-cv-04957
- John Keenan
- Mar. 25, 2021
Background
Jose Santiago moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a federal procedure allowing a person sentenced by a federal court to seek correction of a sentence imposed in violation of federal law or the Constitution. The matter involved both criminal docket No. 08 Cr. 291 (JFK) and civil docket No. 16 Civ. 4957 (JFK).
On December 4, 2008, Santiago pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery, four substantive Hobbs Act robbery counts, and using and brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. The firearm charge was Count Six, brought under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). On October 29, 2010, the court sentenced him to 11 years in prison followed by three years of supervised release.
Santiago filed his § 2255 motion in 2016. The court stayed consideration while courts addressed the constitutionality of the provision in § 924(c) known as the residual, or risk-of-force, clause. Santiago was released from prison in or about February 2018. In April 2020, the court terminated his supervised release immediately after the government consented to his request for early termination.
Legal issue and analysis
The government conceded that, after the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Davis and the Second Circuit’s decision in United States v. Barrett, conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence supporting a § 924(c) conviction. The government agreed that Santiago’s Count Six conviction could no longer stand because it depended on the residual clause, which had been declared unconstitutionally vague. Santiago’s counsel consented to the government’s requested relief.
Ruling
Judge John F. Keenan held that Count Six must be vacated. The court’s order states that Santiago’s conviction on Count Six is VACATED and that Count Six is DISMISSED. The court resentenced Santiago to a total of 11 years’ imprisonment and two years of supervised release on the remaining counts, and directed the clerk to enter an amended judgment.
The conclusion states that Santiago’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence was GRANTED to the extent provided in the opinion. If Santiago had already paid the mandatory $100 special assessment on Count Six, the order states that he was entitled to a refund and directed his counsel to contact the court’s finance department for information about receiving it. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion on the criminal and civil dockets and close the civil case.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.