United States v. McQueen
670 F.3d 1168
11th Cir.2012Background
- McQueen pleaded guilty to three counts of attempted alien smuggling and one count of failing to obey an order by federal law enforcement.
- At sentencing, the district court applied the U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(5)(A) enhancement because a firearm was discharged by law enforcement.
- McQueen objected to the enhancement, challenging the calculation of the advisory Guidelines range.
- Factual backdrop: CBP interdicted the Mary Carla at sea; McQueen fled, officers fired warning shots and pepper balls, then boarded the moving vessel and found 14 aliens aboard.
- The district court’s legal issue centered on whether McQueen induced the firearm discharge for purposes of the enhancement.
- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed McQueen’s 84-month sentence after de novo review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McQueen induced the discharge of a firearm | McQueen argues his actions did not induce the discharges. | Government contends the discharges were a reasonable, foreseeable response to McQueen's evasion. | Discharges were induced; sentence affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Williams, 51 F.3d 1004 (11th Cir.1995) (induced discharge when defendant's conduct led to victim's firing)
- United States v. Digiorgio, 193 F.3d 1175 (11th Cir.1999) (defines induced in ordinary meaning for guidelines)
- United States v. Ellisor, 522 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir.2008) (abuse-of-discretion review and standard for sentencing procedures)
- United States v. Doe, 661 F.3d 550 (11th Cir.2011) (de novo review of Guidelines interpretation and application)
- Bravo v. United States, 532 F.3d 1154 (11th Cir.2008) (support for application of discharge enhancement)