United States v. Pinkin
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6612
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Pinkin pleaded guilty to participating in a conspiracy with Cornelous to transport cocaine to Davenport, convert it to crack, and distribute over thirty kilograms of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A) and 846.
- He was sentenced to 235 months, at the bottom of the advisory guidelines range.
- The district court denied minor participant reductions under U.S.S.G. §§ 3B1.2(b) and 2D1.1(a)(5) and rejected a criminal history point for a marijuana conviction under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(1).
- Cornelous recruited Pinkin in Gary, Indiana in 2003; Pinkin remained a conspirator until September 2005, aiding Davenport operations with large cocaine quantities and handling drug activities.
- Pinkin conducted sales in Davenport, collected payments, and ran the Davenport operation when Cornelous was out of town; testimony showed substantial involvement and multiple trips.
- The court attributed 30.15 kg of the conspiracy’s quantity to Pinkin for base offense level purposes, yielding an adjusted offense level of 37; the marijuana conviction was considered separately for criminal history.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Pinkin is entitled to a minor participant reduction. | Pinkin contends he was less culpable than others but not minimal. | Pinkin argues he was deeply involved, meriting the adjustment. | District court did not err; denial of minor participant reduction affirmed. |
| Whether the marijuana possession conviction was properly counted as relevant conduct for criminal history. | Conviction should be counted as relevant conduct within the conspiracy period. | Conviction was a separate, distinct offense and not part of the instant offense. | Court held the marijuana conviction was separate offense; one criminal history point affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Deans, 590 F.3d 907 (8th Cir. 2010) (how to measure role in the offense by relevant conduct and comparison among participants)
- United States v. Rodriguez-Ramos, 663 F.3d 356 (8th Cir. 2011) (deep involvement standard for minor role determinations)
- United States v. Bradley, 643 F.3d 1121 (8th Cir. 2011) (conspirator deeply involved despite not being the top distributor)
- United States v. Davidson, 195 F.3d 402 (8th Cir. 1999) (relevance of prior conduct to criminal history and separateness from instant offense)
- United States v. Stone, 325 F.3d 1030 (8th Cir. 2003) (factors for severability of prior conduct in determining criminal history)
- United States v. Ault, 598 F.3d 1039 (8th Cir. 2010) (test for relevant conduct and proximity considerations)
- United States v. Boroughf, 649 F.3d 887 (8th Cir. 2011) (precedent on interpretation of relevant conduct in conspiracy cases)