United States v. Tedrick King
20-11125
| 11th Cir. | Jun 23, 2021Background
- Tedrick King was sentenced to 148 months after convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute controlled substances and possession with intent to distribute large quantities of cocaine/crack and other drugs.
- The district court applied a four-level U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a) aggravating-role enhancement (organizer/leader of an enterprise with ≥5 participants) and a two-level U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(12) enhancement for maintaining a drug premises.
- Evidence at sentencing included intercepted text messages showing King ordered others to stop sales when police were nearby and received reports when sales resumed, co‑conspirators reporting low supplies to King, threats to remove members, King controlling the schedule and access to the drug house, and video showing he had a key to the drug storage location.
- King argued on appeal that the district court erred in applying both enhancements and that his 148‑month sentence was substantively unreasonable (he argued 84 months would suffice under § 3553(a)).
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the role and premises findings for clear error and the sentence for abuse of discretion/substantive reasonableness, and affirmed the enhancements and the 148‑month sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 3B1.1(a) four‑level leader/organizer enhancement was proper | King: did not exercise leadership, control, or recruit/command others sufficiently | Gov: texts and witness reports show King directed operations, controlled others, and exercised authority | Affirmed — evidence showed decision‑making, control, and influence supporting enhancement |
| Whether § 2D1.1(b)(12) two‑level maintained‑premises enhancement was proper | King: house use was incidental, not a primary site he maintained | Gov: King controlled access, schedule, discipline, and had key to storage — premises was used principally for distribution | Affirmed — King controlled the premises and activities, supporting enhancement |
| Whether 148‑month sentence was substantively unreasonable under § 3553(a) | King: 84 months would suffice to satisfy sentencing goals | Gov/District Court: sentence within Guidelines, below statutory max, court considered § 3553(a) factors | Affirmed — within Guidelines, court adequately weighed § 3553(a); sentence not substantively unreasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Shabazz, 887 F.3d 1204 (11th Cir. 2018) (factors for organizer/leader role assessment)
- United States v. Martinez, 584 F.3d 1022 (11th Cir. 2009) (government bears preponderance burden to prove aggravating role)
- United States v. Almedina, 686 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 2012) (deference where evidence admits multiple reasonable interpretations)
- United States v. Dixon, 901 F.3d 1322 (11th Cir. 2018) (not all Shabazz factors need be shown to apply enhancement)
- United States v. George, 872 F.3d 1197 (11th Cir. 2017) (elements for maintaining a premises for drug distribution)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard for substantive reasonableness review)
- United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir. 2010) (standard for overturning sentence as substantively unreasonable)