LAWYER INVOKES SENTENCING RULING

Supreme Court Case Used To Argue For Client's Release

Last week, Andre Seymour was facing life imprisonment for his federal drug
conspiracy conviction in Chicago. This week, his lawyer is asking a judge
to release him from custody because of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that
could have a profound effect on federal courts across the nation.

The high court decision has raised constitutional problems with judges
increasing convicted defendants' sentences based on evidence not presented
to juries while using a lesser standard of proof than beyond a reasonable
doubt.

Although the decision dealt with a Washington state case, legal experts
believe it will dramatically affect similar federal sentencing laws and
impact potentially tens of thousands of criminal cases awaiting trial or
sentencing or that are on appeal.

As a result of the Blakely vs. Washington decision, Seymour's lawyer,
Robert Loeb, filed papers this week in federal court in Chicago seeking his
immediate release. Loeb contends that because prosecutors didn't prove
during the trial that Seymour personally sold any drugs, the longest
sentence he could face under the federal guidelines is 21 months in prison.
He has already served 26 months.

But prosecutors had been seeking life imprisonment because of Seymour's
involvement in a round-the-clock crack cocaine operation near an elementary
school in Chicago Heights. He was convicted of conspiring to sell drugs.

"Blakely is a tidal wave," Loeb said.

U.S. District Chief Judge Charles Kocoras said the high court's decision
has created "mass uncertainty" concerning the continued viability of the
federal sentencing guidelines.

Citing the ruling, a federal judge in Utah held the guidelines
unconstitutional on Tuesday.

As long as this period of uncertainty continues, "it can produce chaos,"
Kocoras said.

Randall Samborn, a spokesman for U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald, said
federal prosecutors are handling the situation on a case-by-case basis
while waiting for guidance from the Justice Department.

Prosecutors have had to scramble, sometimes trying to figure out what to do
this week during trials. On Thursday, the sentencing of Thomas Conwell, who
pleaded guilty to fraud, was postponed because of the Blakely decision.

"It's a brave new world," U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman, presiding
over the case, quipped to lawyers.

Among the possible beneficiaries of the decision is businessman Michael
Segal, convicted last week of fraud and racketeering. The defense is likely
to maintain that the jury wasn't asked to decide the extent of the losses
for which he was responsible, a key factor in deciding his sentence.
Prosecutors, though, could point out the same jury ordered him to forfeit
$30 million.

Jeffrey Cole said the ruling could also affect another high-profile
defendant, former Chicago Police Deputy Supt. William Hanhardt, convicted
of heading a jewelry-theft ring.

Another lawyer, Marc Martin, said that in the last week he has received
calls from inmates at the Metropolitan Correctional Center abuzz over the
ruling's impact. "Everyone at the MCC thinks the doors are going to open,"
he said. "But I think courts will bend over backwards to give the Blakely
decision a narrow interpretation."