United States v. Jones
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5096
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Jones arrested Oct. 2004 after police observed possible narcotics sale; search of his residence uncovered 11.4 g crack, nine firearms including a .22 rifle with defaced serial number; rifle not charged due to lack of interstate-commerce proof; PSR applied a two-point § 2K2.1(b)(4) enhancement based on rifle; guidelines base level 32 for firearms offenses; sentencing court adopted calculations and imposed 181-month term with 60-month § 924(c) consecutive sentence; Jones later pursued § 2255 claiming ineffective assistance for failure to object to the enhancement; district court granted relief on that claim and reentered judgment to allow a direct appeal; on appeal, Jones contends the rifle enhancement was improper because the rifle did not move in commerce and thus could not underpin a federal enhancement; court ultimately affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel’s performance was ineffective for not objecting to § 2K2.1(b)(4) based on the rifle | Jones | Jones's counsel should have objected to enhancement based on uncharged rifle | No; enhancement valid as relevant conduct under § 1B1.3 despite lack of interstate movement |
| Whether uncharged conduct can support a sentencing enhancement | Jones | Uncharged rifle relates to charged offenses; should support enhancement | Yes; uncharged conduct can be relevant conduct for sentencing under § 1B1.3 |
| Whether use of state-law illegality of rifle affects the enhancement | Jones | State-law illegality supports relevant conduct; federal jurisdiction not required | No; state law illegality does not preclude relevance; conduct may be considered under guidelines |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel; deficient performance and prejudice)
- Glover v. United States, 531 U.S. 198 (U.S. 2001) (reasonableness of counsel's failure to identify guideline miscalculations in sentencing)
- United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443 (U.S. 1972) (broad information permissible for sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3661)
- United States v. Nance, 611 F.3d 409 (7th Cir. 2010) (relevant conduct may include uncharged conduct if related to crime)
- United States v. Watts, 519 U.S. 148 (U.S. 1997) (sentencing enhancements are not separate crimes; focus on conduct treatment)