6th Cir.

United States v. Brown

June 30, 2026 ·24-6135 ·Published ·Alice M. Batchelder · By James Taylor

The Sixth Circuit affirmed a thirty-three-month prison sentence for a defendant convicted of methamphetamine conspiracy. The court held that the defendant waived his right to be present at resentencing and that prior rulings on drug quantity preclude re-litigation of the issue.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:18

Background

Wendell Brown was convicted of conspiring to distribute methamphetamine and initially sentenced to three hundred sixty months. The Sixth Circuit previously vacated that sentence and remanded for resentencing to determine the purity of non-stipulated methamphetamine. At the resentencing hearing, Brown was absent after instructing his attorney that he did not wish to attend.

The court’s reasoning

The court found that Brown voluntarily waived his right to be present at resentencing through a written letter and his attorney’s confirmation. The court also held that Brown could not challenge the drug quantity attribution because he failed to raise the issue in his first appeal, and the law of the case doctrine barred re-litigation.

Brown was voluntarily absent from his resentencing hearing.

United States v. Brown, No. 24-6135 (6th Cir. 2026)

What it means going forward

The decision reinforces that defendants may waive presence at resentencing through counsel and that issues not raised in a first appeal are generally barred in subsequent proceedings.