United States v. Shelby Young, Jr.
689 F.3d 941
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Young and Lewis conspired to distribute crack cocaine in Iowa City.
- Young pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute at least 28 grams of cocaine base and received 188 months.
- Lewis was convicted by jury of conspiring to distribute less than 28 grams and distributing at least 28 grams and was sentenced to 108 months.
- Law enforcement conducted 14 controlled buys totaling 268.62 grams from the group between July and October 2010.
- A search of Lewis’s apartment yielded 10.65 grams of crack cocaine, a loaded handgun, and $2,086.
- Young challenged the sentence as an abuse of discretion; Lewis challenged drug quantity, minor-role adjustment, and weapon enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Guidelines are to be treated as one factor under 3553(a) | Young argues Guidelines are unconstitutional and not controlling | Young contends the Guidelines are not to constrain a sentence | Guidelines are one factor among others; not controlling; sentence affirmed for Young |
| Whether drug quantity attributed to Lewis was clearly erroneous | Lewis disputes quantity, arguing it was speculative | Lewis concedes some quantities but disputes extent | District court did not clearly err in attributing over 196 grams to Lewis; supported by evidence |
| Whether Lewis deserved a minor-role adjustment | Lewis asserts minor role due to addiction and minimal involvement | Lewis was deeply involved, ran the apartment center of distribution | Court properly denied minor-role adjustment; Lewis was a full participant |
| Whether firearm enhancement was properly applied to Lewis | Gun presence in Martin’s room linked to conspiracy; Lewis aware | Lewis did not possess gun; acquitted on firearms charge | Enhancement applicable if firearm reasonably foreseeable and linked to conspiracy; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (Supreme Court 2007) (Guidelines are one factor among several in sentencing)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court 2007) (Guidelines should be starting point, not mandatory)
- Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (Supreme Court 2007) (Court may consider Guidelines findings and recommendations)
- Booker v. United States, 543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court 2005) (Guidelines are advisory; judges must consider goals and guidelines with other factors)
- United States v. Carpenter, 487 F.3d 623 (8th Cir. 2007) (Constitutional challenge to sentence reviewed de novo; guidance as one factor)
- United States v. Anderson, 618 F.3d 873 (8th Cir. 2010) (Gun enhancement requires nexus and foreseeability)