⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

We hear United States v. Grimm in the Second Circuit. Michael Grimm pleaded guilty to wire fraud and received a five-year federal prison sentence. He was already serving a related state sentence. His plea deal specified five years, but he says that term should be reduced for time already served on the state sentence. The trial judge invited more briefing on whether the sentencing guidelines required that reduction. Grimm withdrew that argument and sought prompt federal sentencing, with the remaining state term running at the same time. He now says that concession rested on mistaken legal advice; the government calls it a deliberate waiver. That distinction may decide whether the court can reach the credit question at all. Waiver means intentionally giving up an argument and can bar appellate review entirely. Forfeiture means failing to raise an argument in time. It leaves the narrower possibility of plain-error review.

United States of America v. Grimm (No. 25-545) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued September 24, 2026.