United States v. Boroughf
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 16828
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Boroughf was charged in a twelve-count indictment and pled guilty to Count 1 (conspiracy to distribute >1,000 kg marijuana) and to Counts 5 and 11 (felon in possession of a firearm).
- The plea agreement included an appeal waiver and Boroughf pled to Counts 1, 5, and 11.
- Count 1 related to a 1994–2009 conspiracy among IMC members to import and distribute marijuana in the St. Louis area, totaling 3,000+ kg.
- Pre-sentencing materials show shipments of marijuana were brought to St. Louis and processed at IMC-controlled sites for local distribution.
- The district court calculated a Guidelines range of 262–327 months for Count 1 based on offense level 34 and criminal history VI, aided by a 1997 prior conviction used for CHC.
- The court imposed concurrent sentences of 262 months for Count 1 and 120 months for Counts 5 and 11, with concurrent supervised releases; Boroughf challenged multiple sentencing aspects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal waiver is enforceable against the sentencing challenge | Boroughf argues waiver is unenforceable | Waiver is valid and covers all sentencing issues | Waiver enforceable; substantive appeal dismissed |
| Whether the sentence is substantively unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) | Substantive reasonableness challenge falls within waiver | Waiver bars challenge; sentence reasonable | Dismissed due to enforceable appeal waiver |
| Whether the district court erred in treating the 1997 conviction as a separate offense for criminal history | 1997 conduct part of Count 1; should be relevant conduct | 1997 conviction is a separate prior sentence | Not clearly erroneous; 1997 conviction treated as separate offense for CHC |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Meeks, 639 F.3d 522 (8th Cir.2011) (Anders issues not pursued in merits brief; standard discussed)
- United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702 (8th Cir.2010) (appeal waiver enforceability; miscarriage of justice consideration)
- United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc; dismissal of sentencing-contentions under waiver not miscarriage of justice)
- United States v. Stone, 325 F.3d 1030 (8th Cir.2003) (relevant conduct vs. CHC distinctions; district court's factual findings reviewed for clear error)