Call us: +1 (215) 360-3988
Federal Appeals & 2255 Proceedings
Federal Appeals & 2255 Proceedings
Federal law is different than state law. That is true in a number of ways. The federal criminal statutes are not the same as the state ones. Even where similar, they are not always interpreted in the same way as state equivalents. Additionally, federal sentencing law is complicated and an area of practice that is sui generis.
Sentencing practice, and potential error in sentencing, are a big part of federal appellate practice. New decisions from the United States Supreme Court, such as Sessions v. Dimaya* and Johnson v. United States** continue to change and refine sentencing law and practice.
It is important to have a federal attorney who is familiar with this case law, has handled federal appeals and 2255 matters, and is equipped to apply both longstanding and newly developed precedent to your advantage in your appeal.
Contact Wiseman & Schwartz to discuss your conviction and options that are available to you.
* Dimaya held invalid a provision of the INA & federal criminal code that would have led to the removal from this country of a lawful permanent resident.
** Johnson
held invalid a similar provision of the Armed Career Criminal Act that would have required the defendant to serve a 15 year mandatory minimum sentence.
Contact Us
