United States v. Dwight Turlington
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 19852
| 3rd Cir. | 2012Background
- Turlington pled guilty in 2002 to conspiring to distribute more than fifty grams of cocaine base under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), 846.
- In 2004, he was sentenced to 84 months’ imprisonment and 60 months’ supervised release, well below the Guidelines but within range implied by the sentence.
- He began supervised release on October 29, 2008, and was charged with DUI in New Jersey on September 6, 2009.
- On December 7, 2009, state police observed three hand-to-hand drug transactions; he fled, discarded a handgun, and police found cash and cocaine; he pled guilty to possessing a weapon while committing a CDS crime.
- The New Jersey court sentenced him to 3 years’ imprisonment for that offense, running concurrently with any federal sentence; on May 26, 2011, the district court revoked supervised release and imposed 60 months’ imprisonment.
- Appellate review challenges centered on whether the revocation sentence should reflect the pre-FSA classification of the underlying offense (class A) or the post-FSA classification (class B).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 5-year term authorized by § 3583(e)(3) was correct | Turlington relied on FSA to reclassify offense to class B, limiting to 3 years. | Sentence should reflect underlying offense classification at the time of original conviction. | Term of five years affirmed; backward-looking statute based on original conviction. |
| Whether retroactive FSA changes affect revocation penalties | FSA retroactivity reduces sentence after revocation. | FSA retroactivity does not apply to those convicted and sentenced before its effective date. | FSA retroactivity does not apply; it does not disturb the original backward-looking framework. |
| Whether the revocation sentence is substantively reasonable | District court failed to meaningfully consider mitigating factors such as plea, cooperation, and rehabilitation. | Court considered § 3553(a) factors; five-year sentence is reasonable given conduct and prior offenses. | Court meaningfully considered mitigating factors; five-year sentence not an abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694 (2000) (revocation penalties relate to the original offense; apply original conviction law)
- McNeill v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2218 (2011) (backward-looking inquiry; max sentence tied to law at time of conviction)
- Dorsey v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2321 (2012) (FSA retroactivity discussed; does not govern pre-effective-date convictions)
- Reevey v. United States, 631 F.3d 110 (3d Cir. 2010) (FSA not retroactive to pre-effective-date convictions)
- United States v. Young, 634 F.3d 233 (3d Cir. 2011) (standard for reviewing revocation sentences; abuse of discretion)