Connect with us

Federal

Kadeem Maynard Awaits Sentencing: Lawyers and Family Advocate for Leniency in Drug Case

Published

on

Kadeem Maynard and his elder counterpart, Oleanvine, stand on the brink of their sentencing. Kadeem’s legal counsel has raised concerns over certain facets of the pre-sentencing review. They have urged the overseeing judge to contemplate a lighter sentence. Earlier in June, the Maynard duo, along with Andrew Fahie, previously holding the position of Premier in the British Virgin Islands, entered a guilty plea over allegations tied to a cocaine-trafficking plot. As part of their commitment, they both agreed to offer their full cooperation with the prosecuting party, in light of a plea bargain which alluded to a potential decade-long sentence.

Recently, between the closing days of July and the initial days of August, the pre-sentencing evaluation reports for both Maynards were presented to the court. On its heels, Kadeem’s lawyers made an official appeal for a sentence modification.

This past April, the U.S. Sentencing Commission opted to institute several alterations to existing sentencing benchmarks. These reforms are set to roll out this coming November. A pivotal amendment was the incorporation of a fresh guideline. This stipulation grants a diminished “offense level” if an accused fulfills particular prerequisites, like having a clean criminal background, and not engaging in violent acts or displaying genuine threats during the crime’s execution. Given the nature of the offense which wasn’t sexually motivated, racially charged, or tied to severe physical harm or death, and didn’t involve firearm dealings, Kadeem seems eligible for a reduced offense level.

Moreover, the legal representatives for Mr. Maynard argue, referencing another segment of the revised guidelines, that non-imprisonment sentences are “typically recommended” when certain conditions, like the one Mr. Maynard meets, are satisfied. Their contention hinges on Kadeem’s clean record, suggesting a variance would be suitable.

On a subsequent update, the defense presented discrepancies in the pre-sentencing document, stressing its failure to propose a “minor role reduction” for their client. They emphasized Kadeem’s restricted involvement in the plot, underlining that he merely connected the DEA’s undercover informant to his mother, Oleanvine, who at the time was the BVI Port Authority’s chief. They adamantly stated Kadeem had no hand in the administrative deception at the port or in the drug consignment logistics.

Most actions in the conspiracy, as per the defense, were primarily driven by Oleanvine and Fahie, not Kadeem. They highlighted Kadeem’s absence in Florida during the cash collection incident that led to Oleanvine and Fahie’s arrest.

To fortify their plea, the defense submitted medical records of Mr. Maynard’s three young daughters, all grappling with ongoing medical needs. They also spotlighted his financial support to another minor child. Supportive letters penned by his family, including a heartfelt one from his spouse, Sherisma Fahie-Maynard, shed light on Kadeem’s remorse and fear of his children’s possible resentment.

Furthermore, Kadeem’s health and academic ambitions were cited. His pursuit of a General Education Diploma has been stalled due to its unavailability at his current detention facility. His entrepreneurial endeavors in Tortola and Baltimore were also mentioned, along with his continuous cooperation with the prosecutors.

A personal letter from Kadeem, conveying his descent into unlawful acts out of desperation to safeguard his family’s residence, accompanied the submissions. In it, he implored for a non-jail sentence, such as probation or home monitoring, to be an active part of his children’s lives.

Contrasting the 11-14 years suggested by the pre-sentencing report, the defense asserts that their client’s eligibility for various reductions should bring the range to approximately 5 years and 10 months to 7 years and 3 months. They contend that Kadeem’s particular circumstances warrant an even reduced sentence.

The verdict on Kadeem’s final sentence is slated for August 21, coinciding with Oleanvine’s judgment day. Meanwhile, the upcoming trial for Andrew Fahie, asserting his innocence, is earmarked for November 1, 2023.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Federal

U.S. DOJ Moves to Reschedule Marijuana to Ease Criminal Penalties

Published

on

The U.S. Department of Justice has announced that Attorney General Merrick Garland has initiated a process to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This proposed rulemaking, submitted to the Federal Register, could significantly change marijuana’s legal status, reduce federal criminal penalties, and acknowledge its accepted medical use in the U.S.

Marijuana has been a Schedule I drug since the CSA was enacted in 1970. On October 6, 2022, President Joe Biden requested a scientific review of marijuana’s classification. Following recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in August, Garland sought legal guidance from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). Based on HHS’s findings and OLC’s advice, the Attorney General has now begun the rulemaking process to reclassify marijuana.

Rescheduling a controlled substance involves a formal procedure that includes public notice, an opportunity for comment, and an administrative hearing. During this process, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) will collect and review public input to make a final determination. Until then, marijuana remains a Schedule I substance.

Historically, marijuana’s classification has faced numerous legal challenges and petitions for rescheduling. Initially classified as Schedule I, marijuana was deemed to have a high potential for abuse, no accepted medical use, and a lack of safety under medical supervision. Despite various attempts to change this status, the DEA has repeatedly denied such requests, adhering to its five-part test for determining a drug’s “currently accepted medical use” (CAMU).

The recent HHS recommendation was based on a two-part inquiry: assessing whether licensed healthcare providers widely use marijuana for medical purposes and whether there is credible scientific support for at least one medical use. HHS concluded that marijuana meets these criteria, supporting its reclassification to Schedule III.

This potential rescheduling raises several legal and regulatory questions. An April 2024 memorandum from the OLC stated that the DEA’s current approach to determining CAMU is too narrow. The OLC asserted that HHS’s two-part inquiry is sufficient to establish CAMU and emphasized that DEA must give significant weight to HHS’s scientific and medical determinations in the rulemaking process.

Additionally, the memorandum addressed compliance with the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and the CSA. It concluded that neither mandates marijuana’s placement in Schedule I or II, and that DEA can meet international obligations by rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III with appropriate regulatory controls.

The rulemaking process will include public participation, with opportunities for comments and a hearing before a final decision. The outcome could change marijuana’s classification, impacting its legal status and medical use availability in the United States.

Continue Reading

Federal

Court Decision Paves Way for Integration of Caneel Bay Resort into National Park

Published

on

A pivotal ruling from a U.S. Circuit Court judge has mandated the transfer of ownership of the Caneel Bay Resort’s buildings and infrastructure to the U.S. Department of the Interior. This decision enables the National Parks Service to proceed with the redevelopment of the iconic resort.

The legal tussle over the rightful ownership of the property began in 2022, involving EHI Acquisitions LLC and the United States Government. Originating from a unique ownership arrangement crafted between 1977 and 1983, the Caneel Bay Resort was built on a 150-acre tract that was part of a larger 5,000-acre donation to the National Park Service by philanthropist Laurance Rockefeller. While the land was deeded to the National Parks Service (NPS), the buildings remained under the ownership of Rockefeller’s company via a “retained use estate.” This arrangement included an indenture with a reversion clause, offering the government the option to acquire the resort buildings at no cost—otherwise, the land would revert to the resort’s owner.

The legal dispute intensified when EHI, having acquired the retained use estate, claimed full ownership of both the land and resort buildings after the government declined a 2019 offer to assume ownership. EHI interpreted this “offer” as a sales proposition, whereas the government viewed it as a no-cost conveyance.

Judge Cheryl Ann Krause clarified this discrepancy in court, affirming the documents’ explicit intention for the land and improvements to be gifted to the government for a nominal fee of $1, as stipulated in the 1983 indenture. She stated, “To keep the land, the Government would have to accept the offer of the improvements. But if that offer were conditioned on payment, then the Government’s retention of that land, in effect, would also be conditioned on payments…meaning it would no longer be a gift.”

Judge Krause further underscored the non-commercial nature of the transaction, reflecting on the indenture’s clear direction for the integration of the Caneel Bay Resort into the Virgin Islands National Park, aligned with both parties’ philanthropic objectives.

Despite EHI’s arguments that the government intended to spend significantly to re-acquire the resort and their attempt to redefine “offer,” the court found these points unconvincing. Judge Krause dismissed these claims and awarded summary judgment to the United States, confirming that since no valid offer was made by EHI before the expiration of the retained use estate on September 30, 2023, the land’s title remains with the U.S. Government.

This ruling confirms that the government not only retains ownership of the land but also gains title to the resort’s structures, with EHI planning to appeal the decision. This marks a significant step towards the full integration of the Caneel Bay Resort into the national park system, reflecting the original intent of its benefactor.

Continue Reading

Federal

Challenges for U.S. Virgin Islands’ Legislative Priorities Amid Washington Gridlock

Published

on

David Schnittger of Squire Patton Boggs outlined the significant hurdles they faced last year in progressing the U.S. Virgin Islands’ policy objectives within a highly partisan environment in Washington. During a recent meeting with the V.I. Public Finance Authority Board, Schnittger explained, “Our efforts in 2023 were dedicated to navigating through the legislative gridlock to advance the agenda of the U.S. Virgin Islands.”

A primary focus for Schnittger’s team was advocating for the permanent extension of rum cover-over rates. He described this effort as a vivid example of the broader congressional stagnation affecting the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. “The 118th Congress has found it challenging to pass legislation across the board, leaving critical initiatives like the rum cover-over extension stalled,” he remarked.

In response to the legislative standstill, Governor Albert Bryan Jr.’s Washington representative, Terry Helenese, has established a weekly working group addressing the cover-over issue. This group includes key stakeholders from both the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, as well as industry representatives.

Beyond legislative advocacy, Squire Patton Boggs has successfully promoted the territory’s policy goals on sustainable energy and economic development by collaborating with federal entities such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy.

Concurrently, the law firm Winston & Strawn is striving to overcome congressional obstacles by working with V.I. Delegate to Congress Stacey Plaskett. Their goal is to secure earmarks in forthcoming appropriations bills that would fund necessary studies by the Army Corps of Engineers for the dredging of the Charlotte Amalie and Christiansted harbors, a step essential for their re-federalization and subsequent maintenance by the USACE.

Moreover, Winston & Strawn is actively pursuing equitable solutions for the residents of the Virgin Islands, focusing on issues like the unavailability of Supplemental Security Income and the rigid funding cap on Medicaid. “Advocating for fair medical treatment remains a cornerstone of our efforts,” stated Winston & Strawn partner Bryant Gardner.

Despite these extensive efforts by the territory’s representatives in Washington, the members of the PFA board were informed that achieving several key policy goals for the Virgin Islands still hinges on breaking through the ongoing legislative deadlock.

Continue Reading

Trending