United States v. Jerry Alexander, Jr.
686 F. App'x 326
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Jerry Wayne Alexander Jr. was convicted by jury of conspiracy to distribute less than 28 grams of cocaine base.
- At sentencing, the Presentence Report designated Alexander a career offender under USSG § 4B1.1 based on multiple Tennessee felony convictions (1998 attempted second-degree murder and aggravated assault; 2007 drug and aggravated-assault convictions).
- The district court calculated the career-offender Guidelines range at 262–327 months, granted a downward variance, and sentenced Alexander to 200 months’ imprisonment.
- Alexander appealed, arguing: (1) the district court improperly relied on state-court judgments to establish predicate offenses for career-offender status; (2) the court erred in attributing certain drug-quantity statements to him; and (3) the court abused its discretion admitting evidence of two controlled buys.
- The Sixth Circuit reviewed de novo the career-offender determination and for abuse of discretion the evidentiary ruling, and affirmed the district court in all respects.
Issues
| Issue | Alexander's Argument | Government's Position | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether state-court judgments are sufficient Shepard documents to establish predicate convictions for career-offender status | State-court judgments are insufficient under Shepard/Mathis to show the elements of the prior offenses | State judgments may be valid Shepard documents and the judgments here show qualifying offenses | Held: State judgments were adequate; Alexander is a career offender and Guidelines range stands |
| Whether the district court improperly relied on Alexander’s statement to attribute drug quantity to him | His statement referred to unrelated conduct and should not increase attributable quantity | Quantity attribution issue is moot if career-offender classification is upheld | Held: Court did not reach merits because career-offender application obviated the issue |
| Whether admission of evidence of two controlled buys was abusive | The buys were not shown to be connected to Alexander or the charged conspiracy | Recorded call showed Alexander discussing "eight and seven," permitting inference linking him to the buys | Held: Admission was not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005) (identifies permissible documents for modified categorical approach)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (clarifies categorical/modified categorical approach distinctions)
- United States v. Baker, 559 F.3d 443 (6th Cir. 2009) (standard of review for predicate-offense qualification)
- United States v. Cooper, 739 F.3d 873 (6th Cir. 2014) (Tennessee Class C aggravated assault is a crime of violence)
- United States v. Douglas, 563 F. App’x 371 (6th Cir. 2014) (Tenn. Code § 39-17-417 is a categorical controlled-substance offense)
- United States v. Moore, 578 F. App’x 550 (6th Cir. 2014) (state-court judgments can be Shepard documents)
- United States v. Morales, 687 F.3d 697 (6th Cir. 2012) (abuse-of-discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- United States v. Kilpatrick, 798 F.3d 365 (6th Cir. 2015) (describing abuse-of-discretion contours)