United States v. Edd Colbert Jones, III
698 F. App'x 607
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Edd Colbert Jones III, a licensed physician, pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and dispense controlled substances under 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C).
- Over two years Jones wrote prescriptions in his mistress’s name and others’, resulting in distribution of between 2,500 and 5,000 units of Schedule III substances.
- Jones provided prescriptions partly to supplement income he gave his mistress, a drug addict; her apparent overdose did not stop his conduct.
- The advisory Guidelines range was 6–12 months; the district court imposed an upward variance to 18 months.
- The court cited Jones’s violation of his Hippocratic oath, contribution to local addiction, seriousness of the offense, lack of remorse, public protection, and deterrence as reasons for the variance.
- Jones appealed, arguing the upward variance rendered his sentence unreasonable; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an upward variance from the advisory Guidelines was unreasonable | Jones: 18‑month sentence (6 months above guideline high) is unreasonable | Government/District Court: variance justified by § 3553(a) factors (seriousness, breach of trust, lack of remorse, deterrence) | Affirmed: variance reasonable under abuse‑of‑discretion review |
| Whether district court improperly considered lack of remorse | Jones: court made a blanket finding of no remorse | Court: considered specific comments showing lack of remorse regarding victims and failure to stop after overdose | Held: consideration of remorse was permissible and supported the sentence |
| Whether the sentence was substantively unreasonable given statutory maximum | Jones: upward variance excessive relative to facts | Court: 18 months is well below 20‑year statutory maximum and within reasonable range | Held: sentence not an abuse of discretion |
| Whether district court misweighed § 3553(a) factors | Jones: court erred in weighing factors to justify variance | Court: provided specific, permissible reasons tied to § 3553(a) and precedent | Held: no clear error in weighing; sentence reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (standard for reviewing sentence reasonableness)
- United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir.) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard and review discussion)
- United States v. Frazier, 387 F.3d 1244 (11th Cir.) (abuse‑of‑discretion framework)
- United States v. McNair, 605 F.3d 1152 (11th Cir.) (permissibility of considering remorse in § 3553 analysis)
- United States v. Croteau, 819 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir.) (upholding sentences well below statutory maximum)