United States v. Gregory Bennett
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3184
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Bennett met with the DEA on March 13, 2006 for a proffer session under a stated promise of non-use against him if truthful.
- During the proffer Bennett admitted supplying marijuana, ecstasy, and crack cocaine to a government informant.
- After the interview Bennett fled and hid; a Wisconsin indictment followed, with a later superseding indictment.
- In 2010 Bennett was arrested in Georgia and pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute ecstasy and marijuana.
- The PSR used Bennett’s proffer statements (marked protected) to determine sentencing decisions, including relevant conduct for crack cocaine.
- The district court accepted the PSR’s recommendations, applying a leadership enhancement and denying acceptance of responsibility credit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of proffer agreement by government | Bennett argues the PSR used proffer statements directly | Government asserts no improper use; statements provided but not used in sentencing | Harmless error; structure supported sentence independent of proffer use |
| Whether crack cocaine was properly included as relevant conduct | 33.9g cocaine not Bennett’s responsibility | Conduct within joint activity and reasonably foreseeable | Properly included as relevant conduct under guidelines |
| Leader/organizer enhancement validity | Bennett did not supervise Hill | Bennett acted as a supervisor/manager of Hill | Upheld; Bennett acted as organizer/leader within § 3B1.1(c) |
| Acceptance of responsibility credit denial | Plea indicated acceptance of responsibility | Obstruction during evasion weighed against credit | Credit denied; district court’s assessment was not clearly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Farmer, 543 F.3d 363 (7th Cir. 2008) (proffer rules; harmless error considerations)
- United States v. Abbas, 560 F.3d 660 (7th Cir. 2009) (harmless error when sentence unchanged by proffer)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (significant procedural error standard in sentencing)
- United States v. Lallemand, 989 F.2d 936 (7th Cir. 1993) (acceptance credit vs obstruction of justice nuances)
- United States v. Figueroa, 682 F.3d 694 (7th Cir. 2012) (leadership role framework under § 3B1.1)
- United States v. Mustread., 42 F.3d 1097 (7th Cir. 1994) (application of leadership factors)
- United States v. Robertson, 662 F.3d 871 (7th Cir. 2011) (clear error review with factual determinations)