United States v. Greeno
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10147
| 6th Cir. | 2012Background
- Greeno was investigated for methamphetamine trafficking; two controlled purchases occurred at his property in Tennessee and Georgia.
- A search of Greeno's property recovered firearms (revolver in RV, handgun in garage) near drugs and paraphernalia, plus an unloaded rifle and ammunition nearby.
- Greeno was charged in January 2010 with conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine; he pled guilty to that conspiracy charge; other counts were dismissed.
- At sentencing, the district court applied a two-level Section 2D1.1(b)(1) dangerous-weapon enhancement, increasing the offense level and overall guidelines range.
- Greeno objected, arguing insufficient connection between firearms and the drug offense and that weapons were for self-protection; the court overruled the objection and imposed 87 months.
- Greeno appealed, challenging both the weapon enhancement and a Second Amendment argument; the Sixth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement | Greeno asserts insufficient evidence linking firearms to offense | Government contends firearms were possessed during relevant conduct and proximate to drugs | Enhancement affirmed; government proved possession and connection to offense |
| Second Amendment challenge to 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement | Greeno argues the enhancement violates the Second Amendment | Government defends constitutionality under post-Heller framework | Plain-error review; challenge fails; enhancement permissible |
| Adoption of a two-pronged approach to post-Heller challenges | Greeno questions post-Heller framework applicability to his case | Government urges adoption of a two-pronged approach | Court adopts two-pronged approach and applies it to uphold the enhancement |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Catalan, 499 F.3d 604 (6th Cir. 2007) (two-step burden for 2D1.1(b)(1): possession and connection to offense)
- United States v. Hill, 79 F.3d 1477 (6th Cir. 1996) (possession during offense required for burden of proof)
- United States v. Faison, 339 F.3d 518 (6th Cir. 2003) (1991 amendments removed requirement that weapon be possessed during the crime)
- United States v. Sanchez, 928 F.2d 1450 (6th Cir. 1991) (presence of weapon can establish connection to offense)
- United States v. Wheaton, 517 F.3d 350 (6th Cir. 2008) (rebuttable presumption weapon connected to offense after possession shown)
- United States v. Hough, 276 F.3d 884 (6th Cir. 2002) (burden on defendant to show clearly improbable connection)
- United States v. Calhoun, 49 F.3d 231 (6th Cir. 1995) (factors for determining 2D1.1(b)(1) applicability)
- United States v. Edmonds, 9 Fed. Appx. 330 (6th Cir. 2001) (cited for contextual framework (unreported) in methods)
- United States v. Chester, 628 F.3d 673 (4th Cir. 2010) (post-Heller two-pronged approach (historical scope and justification))
- Marzzarella, 614 F.3d 89 (3d Cir. 2010) (articulates two-pronged test after Heller)
- Woods, 604 F.3d 286 (6th Cir. 2010) (reversed 2D1.1(b)(1) where possession by co-conspirator was the basis)