United States of America v. Alfred W. Trenkler

Boston, Massachusetts criminal lawyer represented Defendant charged with first-degree murder.



Alfred W. Trenkler

("Trenkler"), a federal inmate serving a life sentence for

convictions stemming from his role in a 1991 car bombing.

Trenkler's is a familiar face: By our count, this appeal marks

his ninth visit to this court after he was convicted and received

his life sentence nearly thirty years ago.1 Consequently, there

is a dense factual and procedural background here.2 For today,

though, we primarily assume the parties' familiarity with the

extensive history of Trenkler's case, the various issues

presented, and the bevy of arguments advanced, providing only the

information and context necessary to explain our reasoning and the

path forward. As we will explain, we remand this matter to the

district court for further review consistent with this opinion.

BACKGROUND

The latest chapter in Trenkler's litigation story began

on January 15, 2021, when Trenkler filed a motion for compassionate

release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (the statute governing

sentence reductions, colloquially known as the compassionate

release statute) based on his serious health risks related to the

ongoing COVID-19 pandemic as well as the unique circumstances of

his case. According to Trenkler, those unique circumstances

include: questions surrounding his guilt; the fundamental

unfairness of his conviction; the fact that his co-defendant

received a lesser sentence; and an error that occurred at his

sentencing in 1994, resulting in an unlawfully imposed life

sentence.

That the sentencing error was, in fact, error is

undisputed. The jury, in convicting Trenkler, found only intent

to destroy property,3 but the trial judge inferred from the

evidence an intent to kill, and thus handed down a life sentence.4

Unbeknownst at the time to the trial judge, prosecution, and

defense counsel, this sentence was imposed in violation of 18

U.S.C. § 34 (1988), as incorporated by 18 U.S.C. § 844 (1988),

which required life sentences to be assigned by the jury. Six

months after Trenkler's sentencing, Congress amended 18 U.S.C.

§§ 34 and 844(d) and (i), removing the requirement of a jury

recommendation for a life sentence.5 It seems likely this change

aided in obscuring the error, as it was not until almost ten years

later that finally Trenkler discovered this sentencing error

himself.6 In the matter now before us, Trenkler points to this

institutional failure in support of his motion for compassionate

release.



* * *

For the reasons just explained, we vacate the district

court's Opinion and Order and remand to the district court for

further proceedings consistent with this opinion.