United States v. Michael Jordan
669 F. App'x 696
4th Cir.2016Background
- Michael Earl Jordan pled guilty to distributing cocaine within 1000 feet of a community college (21 U.S.C. § 860) and received a 36-month prison sentence within the Guidelines range.
- The district court revoked Jordan’s supervised release from a prior felony drug conviction based on the new offense and imposed a consecutive 24-month revocation sentence.
- Jordan appealed both the 36‑month sentence (challenging criminal-history calculation) and the 24‑month revocation sentence (challenging substantive reasonableness); appeals were consolidated.
- The Government moved to enforce an appeal waiver in Jordan’s plea agreement that waived appeals of within-Guidelines sentences and related Guidelines-range issues.
- The Fourth Circuit examined validity of the appeal waiver and separately reviewed the revocation sentence for substantive reasonableness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity/enforceability of plea appeal waiver over challenge to Guidelines calculation | Jordan argued the court erred in computing his criminal history category for the § 860 conviction | Government argued waiver was knowing, intelligent, and covers challenges to a within-Guidelines sentence and Guidelines-range issues | Waiver was valid and knowing; appeal of 36‑month sentence dismissed |
| Substantive reasonableness of 24‑month revocation sentence | Jordan argued the consecutive 24‑month term was substantively unreasonable | Government and district court relied on breach of trust and Jordan’s post‑release drug sales as aggravating factors | Revocation sentence affirmed as not substantively unreasonable; court properly considered breach of trust |
Key Cases Cited
- Copeland v. United States, 707 F.3d 522 (4th Cir. 2013) (validity and enforcement of appeal waivers when plea colloquy shows defendant understood waiver)
- Blick v. United States, 408 F.3d 162 (4th Cir. 2005) (totality of circumstances test for whether waiver is knowing and intelligent)
- Webb v. United States, 738 F.3d 638 (4th Cir. 2013) (standard of review for revocation sentences; affirm if within statutory maximum and not plainly unreasonable)
- Crudup v. United States, 461 F.3d 433 (4th Cir. 2006) (breach of trust is a proper basis for imposing sentence upon revocation of supervised release)