United States v. Johnny Madison
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13060
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- Johnny Madison pleaded guilty to conspiracy and distribution of methamphetamine; district court sentenced him to 140 months (below the Guidelines range).
- Controlled buy: 24.5 g tested at 99.1% purity; investigations implicated suppliers Navrkal, Tilahun, and Suhr.
- A post-proffer report attributed admissions to Madison totaling 519.1 g of actual methamphetamine by applying tested purity rates from seized samples to unrecovered quantities.
- Madison disputed (1) the quantities attributed to him (especially large purchases from Suhr), (2) the application of high purity rates to unrecovered drugs, and (3) the district court’s reliance on his ex-wife Kelli’s testimony that he possessed a rifle.
- The district court credited the PSR and testimony, adopted the 519.1 g figure (base offense level 34), but varied downward to 140 months because the quantity evidence was imprecise and Madison was just over the 500-g threshold.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Madison) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether government proved 519.1 g of actual methamphetamine | Madison said he only bought smaller amounts; proffer report unreliable | Proffer report, officers' notes, and supplier test results support attribution | Court found no clear error; credited admissions and used supplier purity tests |
| Whether unrecovered drugs could be treated as high-purity actual methamphetamine | Purity unknown for unrecovered amounts; should be treated as mixture | Lab tests of seized samples from suppliers and expert testimony justify applying high purity rates | Court affirmed using tested purity percentages to calculate actual quantity |
| Whether district court clearly erred by crediting Kelli’s testimony about firearm possession | Madison argued testimony was uncorroborated and unreliable | Government presented Kelli’s credible testimony; court can make credibility calls | Court held credibility determination is virtually unreviewable and did not clearly err |
| Whether 140-month sentence was substantively unreasonable | Madison argued mitigating factors and Guidelines flaws warrant a lower sentence | District court balanced aggravating and mitigating factors and already varied downward 28 months | Sentence was not an abuse of discretion and was substantively reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Houston, 338 F.3d 876 (8th Cir.) (method for applying tested purity to unrecovered methamphetamine)
- United States v. Mesner, 377 F.3d 849 (8th Cir.) (applying purity of seized drugs to unrecovered quantities)
- United States v. Walker, 688 F.3d 416 (8th Cir.) (allowing imprecise evidence for drug-quantity findings if reliable indicia exist)
- United States v. Bradley, 643 F.3d 1121 (8th Cir.) (support for using imprecise evidence with a record basis)
- United States v. Fairchild, 189 F.3d 769 (8th Cir.) (small sample lab results may be insufficient standing alone)
- United States v. Hicks, 411 F.3d 996 (8th Cir.) (reliance on prior admissions for quantity determinations)
- United States v. Marshall, 411 F.3d 891 (8th Cir.) (clear-error standard for factual findings at sentencing)
- United States v. Symonds, 260 F.3d 934 (8th Cir.) (credibility determinations are virtually unreviewable)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 928 (8th Cir.) (credibility findings are judgment calls)
- United States v. Quintana, 340 F.3d 700 (8th Cir.) (credibility appellate deference)
- United States v. Hairy Chin, 850 F.3d 398 (8th Cir.) (district court may err if sentence relies on clearly erroneous facts)
- United States v. Lazarski, 560 F.3d 731 (8th Cir.) (below-Guidelines sentences are rarely an abuse of discretion)
- United States v. Roberts, 747 F.3d 990 (8th Cir.) (highly deferential abuse-of-discretion review for substantive reasonableness)