United States v. Carlos Johnson
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24587
| 6th Cir. | 2013Background
- Police uncovered that Carlos Johnson stored approximately 1,200 pounds of marijuana at his residence in Blytheville, Arkansas, over an eight-month period as part of a distribution conspiracy supplying dealers in Tennessee.
- Investigators observed at least three instances where co-conspirators traveled to Johnson’s home to pick up bulk quantities (including one pickup of ~300 lbs and one of ~60 lbs).
- A driver arrested by DEA agents admitted delivering four 300-pound loads to Johnson’s home; a subsequent search of Johnson’s (new) residence found 237 pounds of marijuana, a handgun, $15,000 in cash, a scale, and vehicles.
- Johnson pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute marijuana but objected to a two-level U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(12) enhancement for maintaining a premises for drug manufacturing/distribution.
- The district court applied the enhancement and sentenced Johnson to 97 months (low end of the guideline range); Johnson appealed solely challenging the enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Johnson) | Defendant's Argument (United States) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the § 2D1.1(b)(12) two-level "maintaining a premises for distribution" enhancement applies | Johnson: Storage was infrequent (four deliveries over eight months; allegedly only brief periods), incidental to residence, and he was not a high-level conspirator; therefore enhancement is improper | Government: Johnson knowingly stored large quantities (1,200 lbs total; 237 lbs found on search), his home was continuously available to store bulk shipments and was used repeatedly to supply Tennessee distribution, and the home contained tools/proceeds of trade | Court: Affirmed. The enhancement applies because Johnson knowingly maintained at least part of his home for the purpose of storing and distributing drugs (a principal use), supported by quantity, duration, observed pickups, and tools/proceeds found |
Key Cases Cited
- Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993) (Sentencing Guidelines commentary may be authoritative)
- United States v. Russell, 595 F.3d 633 (6th Cir. 2010) (interpreting drug-house concept and holding that a primary or principal use for distribution supports enhancement)
- United States v. Verners, 53 F.3d 291 (10th Cir. 1995) (identifying business characteristics that support finding a premises used for distribution)
- United States v. Roberts, 913 F.2d 211 (5th Cir. 1990) (courts’ prior applications of drug-house concept)
- United States v. Flores-Olague, 717 F.3d 526 (7th Cir. 2013) (applying the guideline enhancement for premises used to store drugs for distribution)
- United States v. Miller, 698 F.3d 699 (8th Cir. 2012) (multiple controlled buys at a residence support a finding that distribution was a principal use)
- United States v. Sanchez, 710 F.3d 724 (7th Cir. 2013) (scope of enterprise and role of premises assess significance of home to drug operation)
- Lorillard v. Pons, 434 U.S. 575 (1978) (when a statute or guideline adopts pre-existing language, prior interpretations may be incorporated)