USA v. Antonio Goins, No. 08-6374 (6th Cir. 2011)

 Annotate this Case

This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on November 20, 2009.

Download PDF
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 11a0487n.06 FILED Nos. 08-6374, 09-5047 Jul 15, 2011 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ANTONIO GOINS; WILLIAM FREEMAN, Defendants-Appellants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) LEONARD GREEN, Clerk ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY BEFORE: BOGGS, ROGERS, and WHITE, Circuit Judges. ROGERS, Circuit Judge. These consolidated cases addressed whether defendants who were sentenced pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreements could qualify for sentence reductions based on retroactive amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines. Both Goins and Freeman were charged with drug and weapon offenses in 2005 and each entered a plea agreement pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C). The district court accepted the pleas and entered judgment. Subsequently, the Sentencing Commission amended the Guidelines to reduce the disparity in the treatment of crack and powder cocaine and made the amendment retroactive. See U.S.S.G. Appx. C, Amend. 706, id. ยง 1B1.10. Goins and Freeman sought to have their sentences reduced, but the district court held that this circuit s precedent in United States v. Peveler, 359 F.3d 369 (6th Cir. 2004), precluded modification of a sentence imposed pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement. This court affirmed. United States v. Goins, 355 F. App x 1 (6th Cir. 2009). The Supreme Court subsequently Nos. 08-6374, 09-5047 United States v. Goins granted certiorari and issued an opinion in Freeman s case, reversing this court s decision and remanding the case. Freeman v. United States, No. 09-10245, 564 U.S. (June 23, 2011). In light of that decision, the Court issued a summary order granting certiorari and remanding Goins s case. Goins v. United States, No.09-10246, 564 U.S. (June 28, 2011). We now remand both cases to the district court for proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court s opinion. -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.