Court Oversight of Boxing Union Continues

The Int’l Boxing Federation was denied a request in Newark, N.J., Jan 8. for its court-appointed monitor to be removed. The monitor had been installed to oversee the sanctioning body following the corruption indictment of its now-convicted founder, Robert W. Lee. U.S. Dist. Judge John Bissell rejected the request and said he would decide later whether to expand the monitor’s powers, as sought by government lawyers pursuing a racketeering lawsuit against Lee. [Times Union (Albany) 01/09/01]

Supreme Court Reverses Chicago Boss’ Conviction
On Jan. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the conviction of Paul Glover, ex-vice president and ex-general counsel of the Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers, & Warehouse Workers Union,  who alleged his attorney was ineffective for failing to challenge the calculation of his sentence, and held that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit erred in holding that the increase in the sentence was not significant enough to be prejudicial.

Glover was indicted and charged with using his control over the union’s investments to obtain kickbacks. Glover’s first trial ended in a hung jury, but in a second trial he was convicted on multiple counts. The pre-sentence investigation report recommended that, pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, the convictions for labor racketeering, money laundering, and tax evasion should be grouped together. The government argued that the money laundering count should not be grouped with the other counts. The trial court held that it would not group the money laundering count.

Glover’s offense level was increased two levels, which resulted in an increase in his sentence. Glover’s attorneys did not oppose the government’s position in the trial court and, on appeal, they did not raise the grouping issue. The 7th Circuit affirmed Glover’s conviction.

Glover filed a pro se motion to correct his sentence and argued that his attorneys had given him ineffective assistance because they did not contest the grouping decision, which unlawfully increased his sentence by anywhere between 6 and 21 months. The trial judge denied Glover’s motion and held, under the 1984 Supreme Court case Strickland v. Washington, the increase in his sentence was not significant enough to amount to prejudice. The 7th Circuit affirmed the denial of the motion. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision authored by Justice Kennedy, held that the 7th Circuit erred in trying to graft a requirement that any increase in a sentence must meet a standard of significance onto the prejudice branch of the Strickland test. [UPI 01/09/01 & Legal Times 01/15/01 (citing Glover v. United States)]