United States v. Tony Lanier Jackson
664 F. App'x 803
| 11th Cir. | 2016Background
- Tony Jackson was convicted in 1998 of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribution of cocaine base and cocaine hydrochloride; the Government sought enhanced penalties under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A), 846, and 851 based on prior state felony drug convictions.
- The PSR attributed 12.535 kg of cocaine base, assigning a base offense level 38 under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 and, after enhancements, an offense level of 44 and Criminal History VI.
- The district court sentenced Jackson to life imprisonment, driven by the statutory mandatory life sentence tied to the § 851 enhancement and 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A).
- In 2015 Jackson moved under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) seeking a sentence reduction based on Amendment 782 (which reduced many § 2D1.1 base offense levels by two levels), arguing the guideline range was lowered to 360 months–life and invoking Kimbrough and Booker to seek greater relief.
- The district court administratively deferred then sua sponte denied relief, concluding Jackson was ineligible because his sentence rested on the statutory mandatory minimum (life) rather than the § 2D1.1 drug-quantity guideline range.
- Jackson appealed; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding Amendment 782 did not lower his applicable guideline range because the statutory mandatory minimum controlled eligibility under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jackson is eligible for a § 3582(c)(2) reduction based on Amendment 782 | Amendment 782 lowered Jackson's guideline range from mandatory life to 360 months–life, making him eligible for reduction | Jackson argued the amendment reduced his guideline range and so § 3582(c)(2) relief is permitted | Not eligible: sentence based on statutory mandatory minimum (life); Amendment 782 did not lower the applicable guideline range under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 |
| Whether applying § 1B1.10 limits violates Kimbrough and Booker | Jackson argued the court must treat Guidelines as advisory and could grant broader relief under Kimbrough/Booker | Government/district court applied § 1B1.10 limits; Eleventh Circuit precedent holds Kimbrough/Booker do not invalidate § 3582(c)(2) limits | Rejected: Kimbrough and Booker do not prohibit the § 3582(c)(2) and policy-statement limitations on sentence reductions (Eleventh Circuit precedent controls) |
Key Cases Cited
- Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007) (addressing sentencing discretion over Guideline disparities)
- United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (holding mandatory Guidelines scheme unconstitutional; Guidelines advisory)
- United States v. Mills, 613 F.3d 1070 (11th Cir. 2010) (an amendment does not lower guideline range for defendants subject to a statutory minimum)
- United States v. Melvin, 556 F.3d 1190 (11th Cir. 2009) (Kimbrough and Booker do not override § 3582(c)(2) and the Commission's policy statement)
- United States v. Jones, 548 F.3d 1366 (11th Cir. 2008) (standard of review for § 3582(c)(2) legal questions)