United States v. Shanda Hawkins
866 F.3d 344
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Hawkins pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine; PSR attributed 770,061.9 kg marijuana equivalent, yielding base offense level 38 and a capped Guideline level of 43.
- PSR assigned a +4 organizer/leader enhancement (U.S.S.G. §3B1.1) and a +2 criminal-livelihood enhancement (U.S.S.G. §2D1.1(b)(15)(E)), producing a Guidelines range that, before statutory cap, equaled life imprisonment; sentence reduced to 480 months by statutory maximum.
- Hawkins objected, arguing she was mainly a romantic partner/follower (not an organizer) and that there was insufficient evidence she earned > $14,500 in any 12-month period to qualify as earning a livelihood from crime.
- The district court adopted the PSR (with minor addendum changes), applied both enhancements, granted a government motion for downward departure, and sentenced Hawkins to 240 months’ imprisonment plus 4 years’ supervised release.
- Hawkins appealed the two enhancements and the substantive reasonableness of her sentence; the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of §3B1.1 organizer/leader enhancement | Hawkins: role was mainly romantic; she lacked decision-making authority or entitlement to more proceeds | PSR/District Ct: Hawkins recruited drivers/enforcers, directed deliveries/collections, sold independently and packaged drugs | Affirmed — factual findings plausible; PSR unrebutted; enhancement applies |
| Applicability of §2D1.1(b)(15)(E) criminal-livelihood enhancement | Hawkins: no direct evidence she personally earned > $14,500 in any year; PSR speculation about amounts | PSR/District Ct: large volumes, admissions of daily thousands, no outside employment; even small share of proceeds exceeds threshold | Affirmed — reasonable inference Hawkins derived ≥ $14,500 and criminal conduct was primary occupation |
| Standard of review for factual findings at sentencing | N/A (procedural) | N/A | De novo review of Guidelines application; factual findings reviewed for clear error; PSR ordinarily reliable absent rebuttal |
| Substantive reasonableness of 240-month below-Guidelines sentence | Hawkins: enhancement errors and mitigating factors (age, limited history) make 240 mos unreasonable | Government/District Ct: district court balanced §3553(a), granted downward departure for cooperation, avoided disparities | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; sentence within/departure explained and not unreasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gomez–Valle, 828 F.3d 324 (5th Cir.) (standard: de novo review of Guidelines application; factual findings for clear error)
- United States v. Alaniz, 726 F.3d 586 (5th Cir.) (factual findings plausible when supported by record)
- United States v. Zuniga, 720 F.3d 587 (5th Cir.) (PSR may be considered if it bears sufficient indicia of reliability)
- United States v. Trujillo, 502 F.3d 353 (5th Cir.) (PSR generally reliable evidence at sentencing)
- United States v. Harris, 702 F.3d 226 (5th Cir.) (defendant bears burden to rebut PSR facts)
- United States v. Rodriguez, 602 F.3d 346 (5th Cir.) (district court may adopt PSR findings absent rebuttal evidence)
- United States v. Cantu-Ramirez, 669 F.3d 619 (5th Cir.) (affirming §3B1.1 enhancement on similar facts)
- United States v. Quertermous, 946 F.2d 375 (5th Cir.) (district court discretion to apply criminal-livelihood enhancement based on value of stolen property)
- United States v. Cryer, 925 F.2d 828 (5th Cir.) (affirming inclusion of market value in criminal-livelihood calculation)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (sentencing review: abuse of discretion for substantive reasonableness; district court to consider §3553(a) factors)