United States v. Christopher Yancy
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16199
| 6th Cir. | 2013Background
- Defendant Christopher Yancy pleaded guilty to felon-in-possession, carjacking, and a § 924(c) firearm count; sentenced to 72 months concurrent on two counts and 84 months consecutive on the § 924(c) count (total 156 months).
- Presentence report and testimony from a minor accomplice (O.P.) recounted Yancy giving O.P. a cell phone and instructing him to pretend to be on the phone to distract/identify a victim; Yancy then robbed the victim and fled in the victim’s car.
- District court applied a two-level U.S.S.G. § 3B1.4 enhancement for use of a minor based on the minor’s testimony and the guideline application note listing actions constituting “use.”
- Yancy did not object at sentencing to the § 924(c) brandishing enhancement but had admitted at plea that he pointed a shotgun at the victim and threatened him.
- After briefing, Alleyne overruled Harris and held that facts increasing mandatory minimums (e.g., brandishing) are elements that must be submitted to a jury; Yancy argued this revived an Apprendi claim and required resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Yancy) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application of § 3B1.4 (use of a minor) | Record lacks proof Yancy took affirmative acts to involve the minor; minor was an equal participant | Evidence (phone, instructions, minor’s testimony) shows Yancy directed/used the minor | Affirmed: district court findings not clearly erroneous; enhancement properly applied |
| Alleyne/Apprendi challenge to § 924(c) brandishing enhancement | Indictment charged only use/carry; Alleyne makes brandishing an element — judicial factfinding inflated mandatory minimum; requires resentencing | Yancy admitted under oath that he brandished; no Sixth Amendment violation because admission supplies the element; plain-error review applies and no prejudice shown | Affirmed: admission of brandishing forecloses Apprendi/Alleyne relief; no plain-error prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Butler, 207 F.3d 839 (6th Cir.) (defendant must have taken affirmative acts to involve a minor for § 3B1.4)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (any fact increasing mandatory minimum is an element that must be submitted to a jury)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (fact increasing penalty must be found by jury beyond reasonable doubt)
- Booker v. United States, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (Apprendi principle applied to facts admitted by defendant at plea)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (standard for appellate review of sentencing reasonableness)
- Olano v. United States, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain-error review framework)