United States v. Andrew Johnson
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 20399
6th Cir.2013Background
- Andrew Johnson pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute at least 280 grams of cocaine base (triggering a 10-year mandatory minimum). Two other substantive counts and state weapons charges were dismissed per the plea agreement.
- The PSR attributed drug quantities to Johnson via coconspirator proffers: Crystal Abbott (70 g), Robert Petrocik (140 g), and Ashley Walker (4,368 g). The court limited findings to amounts directly tied to Johnson and did not double count.
- Johnson conceded responsibility for 75 ounces (≈2.1 kg) of crack attributed to October 2008–September 2009, stipulating to a base offense level of 34, but contested an additional 82 ounces (October 2009–July 2010) attributed principally to Walker.
- At an evidentiary sentencing hearing Walker and Johnson’s mother testified; the district court credited Walker’s detailed, consistent testimony and found by a preponderance of the evidence that Johnson was responsible for the additional 82 ounces, yielding a total of 157 ounces (≈4.45 kg) and a base offense level of 36 (after adjustments, offense level 34; guideline range 210–262 months).
- Johnson was sentenced to 210 months’ imprisonment. He appealed, arguing (1) the quantity finding was clearly erroneous and (2) the judicial factfinding on quantity violated the Sixth Amendment under Apprendi/Alleyne.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court clearly erred in attributing an additional 82 oz to Johnson | Walker's proffer/testimony was unreliable; mother’s testimony showed Johnson lived in Chicago and not involved during disputed periods | Walker’s detailed, consistent testimony and corroborating facts (including Johnson’s concession for other periods) support the finding by a preponderance | No clear error; quantity finding (157 oz) was supported by a preponderance of the evidence |
| Whether uncorroborated coconspirator testimony under a cooperation agreement is presumptively unreliable | Johnson urged categorical rule excluding such testimony as due-process deficient | The government argued existing law requires only minimal indicia of reliability and corroboration where present | Court declined new categorical rule; held existing “sufficient indicia of reliability” standard applied and was met |
| Whether judicial factfinding of drug quantity (beyond the charged 280 g) violated Sixth Amendment after Alleyne | Johnson argued Alleyne requires jury or admission for facts increasing guideline-range and sentence above the plea-based baseline | Government: admitted facts (280 g) preserved mandatory minimum; additional quantity affected Guidelines only, not statutory floor/ceiling | No Sixth Amendment violation: plea admitted the 280 g element; Alleyne does not require jury findings for facts that only affect discretionary Guidelines range |
| Standard of review for sentencing quantity and procedural reasonableness | — | — | Appellate review: abuse of discretion; factual drug-quantity findings reviewed for clear error; sentencing procedure reviewed for reasonableness |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (standard for appellate review of sentencing decisions)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (facts increasing mandatory minimum must be submitted to jury or admitted)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (facts increasing prescribed range are elements requiring jury finding or admission)
- Booker v. United States, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (facts raising penalty beyond plea/jury must be admitted or found beyond a reasonable doubt)
- United States v. Walton, 908 F.2d 1289 (6th Cir. 1990) (district court must err on side of caution; use preponderance for uncertain drug quantities)
- United States v. Young, 553 F.3d 1035 (6th Cir. 2009) (drug-quantity findings are factual and reviewed for clear error)
- United States v. Jeross, 521 F.3d 562 (6th Cir. 2008) (coconspirator testimonial evidence can suffice for drug-quantity determination)
- United States v. Moncivais, 492 F.3d 652 (6th Cir. 2007) (declining categorical exclusion of coconspirator hearsay at sentencing; requiring indicia of reliability)
- United States v. Stout, 599 F.3d 549 (6th Cir. 2010) (coconspirator testimony admissible at sentencing when reliable)
- United States v. Pruitt, 156 F.3d 638 (6th Cir. 1998) (district court may accept undisputed portions of PSR as facts)
Defendant’s sentence is affirmed.