United States v. Terry Golden
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 4971
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Golden pled guilty in 2006 to conspiracy to distribute >50g cocaine base and cooperated with authorities.
- District court granted a 39% downward departure from a 262–327 month range, sentencing Golden to 160 months.
- 2008 amendments reduced the bottom of the guideline range to 240 months; court again applied 39% reduction, resentencing to 146 months.
- 2010 amendments did not change Golden's bottom due to the statutory mandatory minimum, so no further reduction occurred.
- Original range was 262–327 months; mandatory minimum remained 240 months, which governed the bottom after reductions.
- The issue is whether Golden may receive another sentencing reduction under retroactive amendments and related guidelines.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court had authority to reduce Golden’s sentence after 2010 amendments. | Golden seeks additional reduction. | Minimum bounds prevent further reduction. | No further reduction permitted; authority affirmed. |
| Does Application Note 1 to § 1B1.10 permit a reduction when the minimums remain unchanged. | Note 1 authorizes reduction based on applicable range. | Note 1 does not override the minimum. | Note 1 does not authorize a reduction here. |
| Does Application Note 3 support a proportional reduction after a later amendment when substantial cooperation applies? | Note 3 supports reductions when minimums change. | Note 3 not applicable since 2010 amendment did not change Golden’s range. | Not applicable to Golden’s 2010 amendment. |
| Should Liberse or Wren-like reasoning apply to retroactive amendments affecting minimums? | Amendment lowered bottom below minimum; liberalized approach allowed. | Maintain mandatory minimum boundary; Wren approach rejected. | Retains minimum boundary; Wren-like approach rejected. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Washington, 618 F.3d 869 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo authority review under § 3582(c)(2))
- Dillon v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2683 (S. Ct. 2010) (retroactive amendments can lower sentencing range)
- United States v. Baylor, 556 F.3d 672 (8th Cir. 2009) (mandatory minimum governs bottom even after cooperation reduction)
- United States v. Hasan, 245 F.3d 682 (8th Cir. 2001) (en banc; re sentencing on retroactive amendments; boundary rules)
- United States v. Liberse, 688 F.3d 1198 (11th Cir. 2012) (RE: bottom of range lowered below minimum; circuit split noted)