499 F. App'x 294
4th Cir.2012Background
- Frank D. Snyder was convicted in 2004 of conspiracy to distribute powder cocaine, crack, and PCP and initially sentenced to 360 months.
- On direct appeal the conviction was affirmed, but the sentence was vacated and remanded for resentencing after Booker.
- On remand the district court reimposed 360 months; Snyder sought remand for Kimbrough sentencing considerations.
- The court granted a limited remand; while awaiting resentencing, the court reduced the sentence to 324 months under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).
- In 2012 the district court resentenced to 300 months, varying below the Guidelines based on rehabilitative conduct and remaining crack-disparity concerns.
- Snyder appeals, challenging whether the district court improperly considered facts, misapplied the Guidelines, or failed to comply with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); the panel affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Procedural reasonableness of the 300-month sentence | Snyder contends procedural errors in resentencing | Government argues proper application of law and § 3553(a) factors | Procedurally reasonable |
| Substantive reasonableness given rehabilitative conduct and crack disparity | Snyder asserts sentence disparity considerations were misapplied | Government contends reasons supported below-Guidelines variance | Substantively reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentencing review; procedural sufficiency and reasonableness)
- Booker v. United States, 543 U.S. 220 (U.S. 2005) (district courts must sentence within statutory factors guided by the Guidelines)
- Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (U.S. 2007) (unwarranted disparities allow policy-based sentencing within guidelines)
- Carter v. United States, 564 F.3d 325 (4th Cir. 2009) (procedural errors in guideline calculations and explanations reviewed for reasonableness)
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedural framework for reviewing Anders briefs where no meritorious issues exist)
- United States v. Susi, 674 F.3d 278 (4th Cir. 2012) (sentence review within/above or below properly calculated Guidelines is substantively reasonable)
- United States v. Bell, 5 F.3d 64 (4th Cir. 1993) (mandate rule considerations in post-remand resentencing)