United States v. Chadriquez Williams
481 F. App'x 851
4th Cir.2012Background
- Williams was convicted by a jury of possession with intent to distribute marijuana and use/possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking offense; district court classified him as a career offender under §4B1.1(a) and later resentenced on remand to 342 months for the §924(c) count; he challenges three aspects of the case on appeal; the government moves to dismiss the second §924(c) count on remand; the Fourth Circuit reviews for abuse of discretion and deferentially reviews sentencing under Gall and Go; the court affirms after finding no error on the career offender classification, the aiding-and-abetting instruction, and the remand de novo resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Williams’ career-offender designation was proper | Williams argues predicate convictions should not count | Court properly counted predicates; Williams concedes criteria met | affirmed; Williams concedes, no error in classification |
| Whether the aiding-and-abetting instruction was improper given the evidence | Evidence did not support aiding-and-abetting instruction | Instruction permissible as evidence supported aiding conduct | affirmed; no abuse of discretion in instruction |
| Whether the remand sentence of 342 months on §924(c) was properly imposed de novo | Sentence on remand should not exceed original range and factors unchanged | Remand allowed de novo resentencing; within-range and reasonable | affirmed; district court acted within mandate and conducted de novo resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Passaro, 577 F.3d 207 (4th Cir. 2009) (abuse-of-discretion review of jury instructions is proper)
- Nye & Nissen v. United States, 336 U.S. 613 (Supreme Court, 1949) (aiding-and-abetting permissible when evidence shows assistance)
- United States v. Duke, 409 F.2d 669 (4th Cir. 1969) (aiding and abetting may be found when evidence supports cooperation)
- United States v. Moye, 454 F.3d 390 (4th Cir. 2006) (district court may tailor aiding-and-abetting instruction; may vary by count)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (within-Guidelines sentence entitled to presumption of reasonableness)
- United States v. Go, 517 F.3d 216 (4th Cir. 2008) (presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentence)
- Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (2007) (permitting presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentence)
- Bell v. United States, 5 F.3d 64 (4th Cir. 1993) (mandate allows de novo resentencing when remand is unrestricted)