United States v. Sylvester Purham
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 10680
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Sylvester Purham led a crack distribution operation in Quincy, IL; after a 2008 probation revocation he was incarcerated Aug 2008–May 2010, then resumed trafficking after release and was later jailed again in Aug 2010 for unlawful firearm possession.
- While imprisoned on the firearm charge, Purham used recorded prison phone calls to direct his brother Howard and others on running the Quincy operation, including purchases, discipline, and sending proceeds to him.
- Federal agents used recorded calls and other investigation evidence to charge Sylvester and Howard with conspiracy to distribute at least 280 grams of crack; Sylvester pleaded guilty without a plea agreement.
- The PSR attributed ~1.9 kg to Sylvester for sentencing: ~1.8 kg from 2008 transfers (before his 2008 incarceration) and ~190 g from transactions during his 2010–11 federal charged period; it recommended multiple enhancements including a four-level leader/organizer enhancement.
- At sentencing Purham objected that the 2008 quantities were not "relevant conduct" to the charged conspiracy and that the leadership enhancement should be reduced to a manager/supervisor level; the district court overruled the objections and applied the enhancements.
- The Seventh Circuit found clear error in including the 2008 drug quantities as relevant conduct on the record presented, but upheld the four-level organizer/leader enhancement based on Purham’s recorded direction of the conspiracy from prison; case remanded for resentencing on quantity.
Issues
| Issue | Purham's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 2008 drug transactions were "relevant conduct" to the 2010–11 conspiracy | 2008 activity was temporally distant and unconnected; not part of same course or common scheme | 2008 transfers were sufficiently related (common purpose/accomplices) to be included in offense quantity | Reversed: 2008 transactions not shown to be part of same course or common scheme on the record; court clearly erred including them |
| Whether four-level organizer/leader enhancement under §3B1.1 applies | At most a three-level manager/supervisor role; Howard was the real leader | Purham directed operations from prison and exercised decision-making authority over others | Affirmed: sufficient evidence he acted as organizer/leader; district court did not clearly err |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Acosta, 85 F.3d 275 (7th Cir.) (standard and clear-error review for relevant-conduct findings)
- United States v. Bacallao, 149 F.3d 717 (7th Cir.) (same-course-of-conduct factors: similarity, regularity, temporal proximity)
- United States v. Ortiz, 431 F.3d 1035 (7th Cir.) (long temporal gaps require stronger showing of similarity/regularity)
- United States v. Crockett, 82 F.3d 722 (7th Cir.) (other drug transactions alone insufficient as relevant conduct)
- United States v. Longstreet, 567 F.3d 911 (7th Cir.) (clear-error review and factors for §3B1.1 role-in-offense enhancements)