United States v. Raymond Damon Smith
709 F. App'x 385
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- Raymond Damon Smith was convicted in 2002 of conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine; trial court attributed at least 1.9 kg of crack to him.
- Original Guidelines range (with enhancements) was 360 months to life; Smith was sentenced to 400 months and the sentence was affirmed on direct appeal and after Booker remand.
- Smith filed successive 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motions after retroactive crack-cocaine Guideline amendments (Amendments 706/750/759/782) that progressively lowered his Guidelines range.
- In 2014 the district court reduced his sentence to 290 months (mid-range) after amendments lowered his range to 262–327 months; the government had recommended 290 months.
- After Amendment 782 further lowered his range to 210–262 months, the district court granted a third reduction and sentenced Smith to 233 months, explaining its use of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.
- On appeal Smith challenged the extent of the reduction, arguing a prior-conviction factual error infected his sentencing, but the Eighth Circuit found no abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Smith was eligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction | Smith sought further reduction after Guidelines amendment 782 | Government did not contest eligibility and argued for a particular sentence | Court: Smith was eligible; district court properly reduced sentence and set 233 months |
| Whether the district court abused its discretion in the extent of the reduction | Smith argued earlier sentencing relied on a flawed factual premise about a prior conviction that infected subsequent reductions | District court relied on § 3553(a) factors and had previously recognized the correct factual basis | Court: No abuse of discretion; district court legitimately considered history and characteristics |
| Whether the district court adequately explained the sentence above the bottom of the range | Smith requested the bottom of the range (262 months) | District court provided reasons grounded in § 3553(a) for a sentence above the bottom | Court: Explanation was sufficient and justified the 233-month sentence |
| Whether prior factual error (if any) required further relief | Smith claimed error in the factual premise of a prior conviction affected sentencing calculations | District court record (2014 order) showed knowledge of the correct facts | Court: Prior assertion did not undermine the reduction; no relief warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Smith, 378 F.3d 754 (8th Cir. 2004) (direct appeal affirming original sentence)
- United States v. Smith, 429 F.3d 1179 (8th Cir. 2005) (affirming after Booker remand)
- United States v. Long, 757 F.3d 762 (8th Cir. 2014) (standard for § 3582(c)(2) eligibility reviewed de novo)
- United States v. Burrell, 622 F.3d 961 (8th Cir. 2010) (abuse-of-discretion review of decision to lower and amended sentence)
- United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (guidance on sentencing post-Booker)