Appeals court tosses Jan. 6 sentence in ruling that could affect more than 100 cases

[Social Media]

 

The recent ruling by a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., has significant implications for more than 100 cases related to the January 6th attack on the Capitol. The three-judge panel's decision centered on the sentencing of a defendant for his role in interfering with the certification of Joe Biden's victory during the electoral college vote-counting process. This ruling raises the possibility of resentencing for numerous Jan. 6 defendants who received similar sentences based on the same grounds.

 

The case in question involved Larry Brock, who appealed his sentence to the Washington court. While the panel upheld Brock's overall conviction, it struck down a portion of his sentence related to "substantial interference with the administration of justice." The appeals court clarified that the term "administration of justice" does not encompass Congress's role in the electoral certification process.

 

According to the ruling, Brock's actions, while endangering democratic processes and temporarily disrupting Congress's constitutional work, did not amount to interference with the administration of justice as defined by sentencing guidelines. Brock had been convicted on six charges, including obstructing Congress's certification of the electoral count.

 

This decision has implications for more than 100 defendants in Jan. 6 cases who had similar enhancements applied to their sentences. Patricia Hartman, a spokesperson for the D.C. U.S. attorney's office, confirmed that over 100 defendants had been affected by this sentencing enhancement.

 

The ruling comes amidst ongoing legal proceedings related to the January 6th riot, with more than 1,300 defendants charged in connection to the events. Of these, around 750 have pleaded guilty to federal charges, and approximately 785 have been sentenced.

Additionally, the Supreme Court is expected to decide on a separate Jan. 6 defendant's appeal concerning obstruction charges. This decision will have broader implications for other defendants facing similar charges of obstruction related to the events of January 6th.

 

03.03.24

Source