United States v. Marcus Manchion
692 F. App'x 695
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Marcus Manchion pled guilty to distribution of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and was sentenced to 96 months' imprisonment.
- The district court designated Manchion a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines based on two prior West Virginia cocaine convictions (2009 possession with intent to distribute; 2014 attempted distribution).
- Defense counsel filed an Anders brief arguing there were no nonfrivolous issues but questioned the career-offender designation, specifically whether the 2014 attempt conviction qualified as a "controlled substance offense."
- The Government did not file a brief; Manchion did not file a pro se supplemental brief.
- The district court calculated the Guidelines range, allowed allocution, considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and imposed a below-Guidelines sentence.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed for procedural and substantive reasonableness and affirmed the conviction and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2014 WV attempted distribution conviction counts as a "controlled substance offense" for career-offender purposes | Manchion: the attempt conviction does not qualify | Government/District Court: the attempt conviction qualifies as a controlled-substance offense | Affirmed: attempt conviction qualifies (controlled-substance offense) |
| Whether the district court procedurally erred in sentencing | Manchion: implied challenge to career-offender designation and Guidelines calculation | Court: properly calculated Guidelines, considered §3553(a), heard allocution | Affirmed: no significant procedural error |
| Whether the below-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable | Manchion: sentence may be excessive given challenge to career-offender status | Government: sentence within reason given facts and factors | Affirmed: below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable |
| Whether there are any nonfrivolous appellate issues under Anders | Defense counsel: filed Anders brief finding none | Fourth Circuit: reviewed record for meritorious issues | Affirmed: no meritorious issues found |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedure for counsel to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (standards for reviewing sentence reasonableness)
- United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295 (4th Cir. 2014) (presumption of substantive reasonableness for Guidelines sentences)
- United States v. Dozier, 848 F.3d 180 (4th Cir. 2017) (West Virginia attempt-to-distribute conviction qualifies as a controlled-substance offense for career-offender rule)