United States v. Roderick Sinclair, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20180

Sinclair was arrested in Elkhart, Indiana for driving with a suspended license and found with marijuana, a loaded handgun, and drug-paraphernalia in his car.
He was federally indicted for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, and possession of a firearm as a felon.
A continuance to allow private counsel hire was denied by the district court; trial proceeded and Sinclair was convicted on all counts.
Presentence reporting recommended grouping counts 1 and 3 under § 3D1.2, but the judge declined to group due to a § 924(c) conviction.
The district court sentenced Sinclair to 57 months on counts 1 and 3 concurrently, plus a mandatory 60-month consecutive term for § 924(c), totaling 117 months.
On appeal, Sinclair challenged the continuance denial under the Sixth Amendment and the decision not to group counts 1 and 3.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether denial of continuance violated Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice	Sinclair (plaintiff) argues denial infringed right to private counsel	Sinclair (defendant) contends district court abused discretion by denying continuance	No; discretion proper, no abuse of discretion
Whether counts 1 and 3 should be grouped under § 3D1.2(c)	Counts 1 and 3 should be grouped because each embodies a specific offense characteristic of the other	Due to § 924(c) mandatory consecutive sentence and § 2K2.4(cmt.4), grouping is not warranted here	Counts 1 and 3 not grouped under § 3D1.2(c) for this combination of offenses

Gonzalez-Lopez v. United States, 548 U.S. 140 (U.S. 2006) (right to counsel of choice; trial court broad discretion on continuances)
Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153 (U.S. 1988) (principles governing right to counsel; scheduling)
Carlson v. Jess, 526 F.3d 1018 (7th Cir. 2008) (balancing continuance interests; absence of timely request weighs)
Morris v. Slappy, 461 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1983) (presumption in favor of counsel; broad discretion in continuances)
Ungar v. Sarafite, 376 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1964) (continuance standard; expediency vs. justice)
Sellers, 645 F.3d 830 (7th Cir. 2011) (preserves counsel-of-choice right; require weighing factors)
Gaya, 647 F.3d 636 (7th Cir. 2011) (costs of last-minute continuance; defendant’s diligence in seeking new counsel)
Bell, 477 F.3d 607 (8th Cir. 2007) (grouping firearm and drug offenses despite 924(c) conviction; circuit split)
Espinosa, 539 F.3d 926 (8th Cir. 2008) (recognizes circuit split treatment of Bell scenario)