967 F.3d 563
6th Cir.2020Background
- In 1993 Snow was convicted of (1) conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and (2) conspiracy to kill while engaged in a conspiracy to distribute at least 50 grams of cocaine base; the district court sentenced him to 327 months (Count 1) and life (Count 2).
- This court affirmed Snow’s conviction and sentence on direct appeal.
- Snow sought a sentence reduction under § 404 of the First Step Act, which makes parts of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 retroactive.
- Snow argued the Fair Sentencing Act raised the § 841(b)(1)(A) threshold from 50 grams to 280 grams, so his § 848(e)(1)(A) murder sentence (which requires an offense punishable under § 841(b)(1)(A)) is a “covered offense” eligible for § 404 relief.
- The district court denied relief; Snow appealed. The government noted a separate concurrent-sentence issue but Snow did not seek relief for Count 1.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Snow’s § 848(e)(1)(A) conviction is a “covered offense” under § 404 of the First Step Act | Snow: Fair Sentencing Act raised the § 841(b)(1)(A) threshold to 280 g, so the statutory penalties “were modified,” making his § 848 conviction covered and eligible for resentencing | Gov: The Fair Sentencing Act did not merely adjust § 848 penalties; it eliminated the statutory predicate for Snow’s conviction, so there are no modified penalties to apply | Court: Not a covered offense; the Fair Sentencing Act did not “modify” § 848 penalties in the ordinary sense but removed the underlying predicate, and § 404 presupposes an existing sentencing range to reduce |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Snow, 48 F.3d 198 (6th Cir. 1995) (affirming conviction and sentence)
- United States v. Watkins, 625 F.3d 277 (6th Cir. 2010) (district courts may modify sentences only as authorized by statute)
- United States v. Boulding, 960 F.3d 774 (6th Cir. 2020) (de novo review of First Step Act eligibility)
- United States v. Foreman, 958 F.3d 506 (6th Cir. 2020) (illustrating typical First Step Act degree-based sentencing reductions)
- MCI Telecomms. Corp. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 512 U.S. 218 (1994) (interpreting ordinary meaning of statutory terms)
- Sandison v. Mich. High Sch. Athletic Ass’n, 64 F.3d 1026 (6th Cir. 1995) (supporting interpretive usage of "modify")