United States v. Shawn House
872 F.3d 748
6th Cir.2017Background
- Shawn House ran an oxycodone distribution operation (2011–2014) that sourced pills from a Michigan pain clinic’s patients and used runners to transport pills and drug proceeds between Detroit and Ohio.
- A former runner became a DEA confidential informant (CI) in October 2014 and assisted in several controlled deliveries that implicated House and other runners (Rouse, Roxann Matter, Clara Tolon-Garcia).
- House pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute oxycodone but disputed the charged 2011–2014 duration, asserting a shorter November 2013–October 2014 timeframe at the plea colloquy.
- At sentencing the PSR applied a four-level leadership enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a) (organizer/leader of an activity with five or more participants) and attributed drug quantity over the 2011–2014 period; the court adopted the PSR findings and imposed a 180-month sentence (below Guidelines).
- House appealed, challenging (1) the leadership enhancement and whether five participants existed (including whether the CI counts), (2) the PSR’s conspiracy duration and resulting drug-quantity attribution, and (3) his career-offender designation based on prior Michigan drug convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leadership enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a) (five-or-more participants) | Government: Five participants existed (House, Rouse, the CI, Matter, Tolon-Garcia); enhancement appropriate | House: Court failed to identify five participants and improperly counted the CI | Affirmed — court adopted government’s list; record supports finding of five participants |
| Whether the CI may be counted as a participant | Government: CI was a drug runner prior to cooperation and thus a participant | House: Informant cannot be "criminally responsible" and so cannot count | Affirmed — informant’s pre-cooperation criminal involvement qualifies him as a participant |
| Conspiracy duration for sentencing (drug-quantity attribution) | Government/PSR: Conspiracy ran 2011–2014 (CI statements support) | House: Plea colloquy limited his admitted conspiracy to 2013–2014; PSR duration unsupported | Affirmed — district court may rely on PSR absent contrary evidence; House did not rebut CI-based PSR timeline |
| Career-offender predicate convictions under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a) (Michigan statute divisibility) | Government: Michigan § 333.7401 is divisible; prior convictions qualify as possession with intent to deliver | House: Michigan statute indivisible; prior convictions do not categorically match Guideline predicate | Affirmed — Michigan statute treated as divisible; modified categorical approach shows prior convictions match the generic offense |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Olive, 804 F.3d 747 (6th Cir. 2015) (standard of review for § 3B1.1 legal conclusions and factual findings)
- United States v. Carroll, 893 F.2d 1502 (6th Cir. 1990) (definition of "participant" for § 3B1.1 commentary)
- United States v. Lang, 333 F.3d 678 (6th Cir. 2003) (district court may rely on PSR absent credible rebuttal)
- United States v. Louchart, 680 F.3d 635 (6th Cir. 2012) (guilty-plea factual limitations do not bar sentencing reliance on related conduct)
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013) (modified categorical approach for divisible statutes)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (distinguishing divisible statutes and use of modified categorical approach)