United States v. Antwine
701 F. App'x 692
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- Darrick Dion Antwine pleaded guilty pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement that specified a 240-month term of imprisonment.
- The plea agreement set a specific sentence and did not state that the term was based on a Guidelines range; the government made limited promises (no departures; recommend 3-level acceptance), which the court mooted by accepting the plea.
- The probation office later calculated Antwine’s Guidelines range as 292–365 months, higher than the agreed 240 months.
- Antwine moved under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) seeking a sentence reduction based on an intervening Guidelines change.
- The district court dismissed the § 3582(c)(2) motion for lack of jurisdiction; Antwine appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 3582(c)(2) authorizes a reduction of Antwine’s 11(c)(1)(C) fixed-term sentence | The district court lacks jurisdiction to reduce because the sentence was not based on the Guidelines | Antwine argued his sentence was "based on" the Guidelines and therefore § 3582(c)(2) applies | The court held § 3582(c)(2) does not apply because the 11(c)(1)(C) agreement imposed a specific term not shown to be based on a Guidelines range |
| How to determine when an 11(c)(1)(C) sentence is "based on" the Guidelines | N/A (legal standard developed from precedent) | Argued that Freeman concurrence test permits relief only if agreement ties the term to a Guidelines range | The Freeman test controls: 11(c)(1)(C) sentences are "based on" Guidelines only if the agreement calls for a sentence within a Guidelines range or specifies a term and makes clear it is grounded in a Guidelines range; Antwine’s agreement did neither |
Key Cases Cited
- Freeman v. United States, 564 U.S. 522 (2011) (Sotomayor concurrence supplies the controlling test for when an 11(c)(1)(C) sentence is “based on” the Guidelines)
- United States v. Jordan, 853 F.3d 1334 (10th Cir. 2017) (explains § 3582(c)(2) requirements and applies Freeman test)
- United States v. Graham, 704 F.3d 1275 (10th Cir. 2013) (recognizes Sotomayor concurrence in Freeman as the Court’s narrowest controlling rationale)
- United States v. Trujeque, 100 F.3d 869 (10th Cir. 1996) (district court lacks authority under § 3582(c)(2) when sentence is not based on the Guidelines)
Affirmed: dismissal of the § 3582(c)(2) motion for lack of jurisdiction; Antwine’s 240-month 11(c)(1)(C) sentence was not "based on" the Guidelines and thus not eligible for reduction under § 3582(c)(2).