The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Thursday to hear Abbott v. United States of America, in which the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic of the University Law School will represent the petitioner, Kevin Abbott.

With the help of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, Abbott is contesting a sentence he received from the U.S. Court of Appeals, arguing that he unlawfully received an excess of consecutive minimum sentences, University Law School Prof. Daniel Oritz said.

Abbott was arrested and prosecuted for a drug trafficking crime; he was given an additional five years for possessing a gun and 15 more years for possessing a firearm as a convicted felon, Ortiz said.
The clinic became involved with the case once it passed through the U.S. Court of Appeals, said Law School lecture David Goldberg, a lawyer at Donnaghue and Goldberg who is working with the clinic on the case. After Goldberg and other professors convinced law students participating in the clinic to take the case, the students created a brief for the case to submit to the Court for review, Goldberg said.

“Now that the case has been accepted, the students will do the work to create the case, including primary legal research, drafting and outlining,” Ortiz said.

Abbott was convicted because of a provision that contains an ‘except clause’ pertaining to extent of additional sentences that can be added to a defendant’s sentencing, Oritz said.

“The ‘except clause’ states that a person convicted of a drug-trafficking crime or a crime of violence shall receive an additional sentence of five years unless a greater minimum sentence is provided by any other provision of the law,” he added.

The  law students will conduct and compile research with the intent of proving that the clause was interpreted incorrectly in Abbott’s case.

The Court will review the intent of this clause when the case is reviewed in the fall.

During the last four years, the Clinic has worked on four cases since it began in 2006. Abbott v. United States is its fifth case so far.