United States v. Sidney, No. 11-1216 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of crack cocaine on or about March 12, 2009, and a plea was entered pursuant to a plea agreement on December 11, 2009. Months later, on August 3, 2010, the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA), Pub. L. No. 111-120, 134 Stat. 2372, was signed into law. At issue was whether defendant should have been allowed to withdraw his plea for the reason that the change in the penalty provisions for his offense constituted a "fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal" as provided under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(d)(2)(B). The court held that because this argument ultimately depended on whether the FSA was retroactive, and because the court had definitively determined that it was not retroactive, the judgment was affirmed.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal Law and Sentencing. Fair Sentencing Act is not retroactive, even as to defendants who were sentenced after the enactment of the Act where there criminal conduct occurred before the enactment and the fact that the Act has been found not to be retroactive was not a "fair and just reason" for allowing defendant to withdraw his plea of guilty under Rule 11.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on August 21, 2012.
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.