Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, the appellant, Kevin Keith Furlong, challenged his jury conviction for two counts of bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and his subsequent 150-month sentence. Furlong contended that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated when he was allowed to represent himself. The appellate court, however, upheld the conviction, finding that Furlong had voluntarily asserted his right to self-representation and was duly informed of the associated risks during a Faretta hearing. Despite affirming the conviction, the court vacated the sentence, remanding the case for resentencing in accordance with United States v. Ameline and United States v. Kortgaard. The court also addressed a procedural matter by denying Robin Hammond's motion to withdraw as counsel, with the option for renewal in the district court. The ruling emphasized that the decision is not to be published or cited in future cases, adhering to the restrictions outlined in Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. The outcome maintained Furlong's conviction while offering an opportunity for a revised sentencing procedure.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Review of Sentencingsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court vacated Furlong's sentence and remanded for resentencing to align with principles set forth in United States v. Ameline and United States v. Kortgaard.
Reasoning: The court remands the case for resentencing consistent with precedents established in United States v. Ameline and United States v. Kortgaard.
Non-Publication and Citation Restrictionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision in this case is not intended for publication and is restricted from being cited in future cases except as permitted by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Reasoning: This decision is not intended for publication and cannot be cited in future cases, except as allowed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Right to Self-Representation under the Sixth Amendmentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The defendant, Kevin Keith Furlong, was allowed to represent himself after voluntarily waiving his right to counsel, demonstrating an understanding of the risks involved during a Faretta hearing.
Reasoning: The court finds this argument unpersuasive, noting that Furlong voluntarily asserted his right to self-representation at his arraignment and was properly advised about the risks of proceeding pro se during the Faretta hearing.