United States v. Vedo McClain
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 17297
6th Cir.2012Background
- McClain pleaded guilty to three counts of crack cocaine distribution under a Rule 11 plea agreement.
- At sentencing, base/offense level and total offense level were calculated under § 2D1.1; post-departure range was 151–188 months, but mandatory minimum 240 months applied due to prior felony conviction.
- Government’s substantial-assistance motion led to a two-level departure; district court sentenced McClain to 151 months.
- Amendments 706 and 713 lowered the crack guidelines; McClain sought § 3582(c)(2) relief relying on these amendments retroactively.
- District court denied relief, ruling McClain’s sentence was based on the mandatory minimum, not a lowered range, rendering § 3582(c)(2) inapplicable.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding McClain’s sentence was based on a guidelines range that was lowered, but relief was not available because the reduction would not be consistent with policy statements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentence was 'based on' a lowered range | McClain argues the sentence was based on advisory guidelines (2D1.1) and amended ranges. | Government contends the mandatory minimum governed, not the lowered range. | Yes; the sentence was based on a guidelines range that has been lowered. |
| Whether the reduction is consistent with policy statements | McClain contends amendments 706/713 and policy statements permit relief. | Government argues policy statements require lowering the applicable range, which did not occur here due to mandatory minimum. | No; reduction not consistent with policy statements; ineligible under § 3582(c)(2). |
Key Cases Cited
- Hameed, 614 F.3d 259 (6th Cir. 2010) (two-step 'based on' and consistency with policy statements)
- Dillon v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2683 (Supreme Court 2010) (statutory requirement of consistency with policy statements)
- Freeman v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2685 (Supreme Court 2011) (recognizes relief for crack defendants where lower range applies)
- Goff, 6 F.3d 363 (6th Cir. 1993) (guidelines vs. mandatory minimum conflict governs sentencing range)
- Pembrook, 609 F.3d 381 (6th Cir. 2010) (total offense level vs. base offense level in guideline range calculation)