United States v. Salatheo Fluid
20-4481
| 4th Cir. | Mar 8, 2022Background
- Salatheo Fluid pled guilty, per a written plea agreement, to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine (21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846) and was sentenced to 188 months’ imprisonment.
- At the search of the residence where Fluid was sleeping officers found a firearm, drugs, and roughly $8,000 in cash in the bedroom; a sock containing drugs was found in the yard and a matching sock was recovered in Fluid’s room.
- A cooperating defendant said Fluid told him he threw the sock out the window when officers entered; the government relied on that and other evidence at sentencing to attribute the yard drugs to Fluid.
- The district court applied a two-level Guideline enhancement for possession of a dangerous weapon and made drug-quantity findings by a preponderance of the evidence.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief asserting no meritorious issues but raised: plea voluntariness, ineffective assistance, and sentencing reasonableness; Fluid filed pro se supplemental briefs raising a Fourth Amendment search claim and expanding on other points.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record, found no reversible error, and affirmed the amended judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plea was knowing and voluntary | Government: Rule 11 colloquy complied; plea supported by factual basis | Fluid: Plea not knowing/voluntary | Court: Plea was knowing/voluntary; Rule 11 omissions were minor and not plain error |
| Validity of pre-plea Fourth Amendment search | Government: Search evidence admissible and plea waives pre-plea challenges | Fluid: Search violated Fourth Amendment and evidence should be excluded | Court: Claim waived by unconditional guilty plea under Tollett v. Henderson |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to move to exclude evidence; failure to advise collateral consequences) | Government: Record does not show clear entitlement on direct appeal | Fluid: Counsel was ineffective in those respects | Court: Declined to address on direct appeal; such claims are for § 2255 to develop the record |
| Sentencing: weapon enhancement and drug-quantity attribution | Government: Weapon found in bedroom with drugs/cash supports §2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement; cooperating witness and matching sock support drug quantity attribution | Fluid: No evidence linking him to firearm; sock in yard was not in his possession when found | Court: Applying enhancement and attributing drug quantity were not clearly erroneous; 188-month within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (procedural rule for appointed counsel who finds appeal frivolous)
- Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (guilty plea waives pre-plea constitutional claims)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (standard for procedural and substantive reasonableness of sentences)
- United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517 (Rule 11 plain-error review when plea withdrawal not sought)
- United States v. Fitzgerald, 820 F.3d 107 (plea-based waiver principles)
- United States v. Faulls, 821 F.3d 502 (ineffective-assistance claims may require §2255 for development)
- United States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214 (post-plea ineffective-assistance procedure)
- United States v. Mondragon, 860 F.3d 227 (application of §2D1.1 weapon enhancement)
- United States v. Davis, 918 F.3d 397 (preponderance standard for drug-quantity at sentencing)
- United States v. Seigler, 990 F.3d 331 (elements of conspiracy under §846)