United States v. Randall McGee
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 23212
| 4th Cir. | 2013Background
- McGee was convicted in the Southern District of West Virginia for possession with intent to distribute oxycodone and sentenced to 55 months.
- A prior July 10, 2011 stop at a Charleston bus station yielded $5,800 seized from McGee and text messages suggesting drug activity.
- A subsequent July 26, 2011 traffic stop on I-77 led to McGee’s arrest and discovery of 246 oxycodone and 151 oxymorphone pills.
- McGee unsuccessfully challenged the stop as invalid, with the district court crediting an officer’s testimony that a center brake light was nonfunctional.
- The PSR treated the bus-station cash as drug-proceeds and added its value to the drug-quantity calculation under the guidelines, increasing the sentencing range.
- The district court found the cash seizure and the stop to be part of the same course of conduct and imposed a 55-month sentence, which McGee appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was valid under Fourth Amendment standards. | McGee argues the brake-light defect was not proven; stop unsupported. | The government argues the stop was supported by probable cause from a nonworking brake light. | Stop upheld; credibility determinations supported the finding of nonoperational brake light. |
| Whether cash seized weeks earlier can be counted as relevant conduct for drug-quantity sentencing. | Cash tied to unrelated bus-station incident cannot bear on the drugs. | Cash proceeds can be treated as same-course conduct under §1B1.3(a)(2). | Court did not err in including cash as relevant conduct to determine drug-quantity. |
| Whether the sentence was procedurally reasonable and individualized. | Court relied on Detroit-origin drug-supply as a factor indicating need for deterrence without individualized analysis. | District court provided reasons tied to history, offense, and deterrence; not improper focus on Detroit. | Sentence procedurally reasonable with individualized consideration under 18 U.S.C. §3553(a). |
Key Cases Cited
- Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (Supreme Court 2007) (car passengers have standing to challenge traffic stops; Terry framework applies to stops)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (Supreme Court 1996) (the stop may be based on a traffic violation observed by police)
- United States v. Branch, 537 F.3d 328 (4th Cir. 2008) (nonfunctioning brake light justifies detention during stop)
- United States v. Guijon–Ortiz, 660 F.3d 757 (4th Cir. 2011) (standard for limits of police conduct in traffic stops)
- Ellington, 396 F. Supp. 2d 695 (E.D. Va. 2005) (credibility assessments in suppression rulings; nonbinding district court authority)
- Carmichael v. Village of Palatine, 605 F.3d 451 (7th Cir. 2010) (credibility of officer's statements on brakes; suppression outcome depends on credibility)
- United States v. Vaughan, 700 F.3d 705 (4th Cir. 2012) (standard of review for suppression findings; de novo legal conclusions, clear-error factual findings)
- United States v. Davis, 679 F.3d 177 (4th Cir. 2012) (review of sentencing issues and factual findings)