United States v. Wright
695 F. App'x 585
| 1st Cir. | 2017

Background

  • Corinthian Wright pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin and cocaine base and two substantive possession-with-intent counts; sentenced to 96 months and appealed sentencing enhancements.
  • Investigation (surveillance, controlled buys, wiretaps) tied Wright to trafficking between New York and Lewiston–Auburn, Maine; co-conspirators included Dent, Thompson, Francis, Gosselin, Jackson, and others.
  • Evidence: intercepted calls and witness statements that Wright financed apartments and drug purchases; fingerprints of Wright on bags of drugs found in a vacant apartment; large quantities of cocaine base and heroin and four firearms found in connected apartments.
  • At sentencing the district court applied a 3-level leadership enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b) (manager/supervisor with ≥5 participants) and a 2-level firearm enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1). Wright objected.
  • With adjustments (including acceptance of responsibility), the court calculated a total offense level of 32 (GSR 121–151 months) and imposed a downward-variant 96-month sentence. The First Circuit affirmed.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Role-in-offense enhancement (U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b)) Wright: not a manager/supervisor; at most a supplier/retailer; activities constituted two separate conspiracies Government/district court: Wright financed apartments, recruited others, and exercised supervisory control; conspiracy involved ≥5 participants Affirmed — district court did not clearly err; evidence supported managerial role and single conspiracy
Firearm enhancement (U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1)) Wright: unaware of firearms; absent when guns were placed; no proof he possessed or knew of guns Government: firearms found near drugs with Wright’s fingerprints on drug bags; in conspiracies weapons possession by co-conspirators is reasonably foreseeable Affirmed — foreseeability of co-conspirator weapon possession satisfied; defendant failed to show it was clearly improbable guns were connected to the conspiracy
Substantive reasonableness of sentence Wright: 96 months is below Guidelines but would exceed correct GSR if enhancements removed; sentence therefore unreasonable Government: enhancements properly applied; 96-month below-guidelines variant was reasonable Affirmed — because enhancements stand, no separate substantive-reasonableness problem raised
Standard of review for sentencing findings Wright: challenges factual and procedural application of enhancements Government: sentencing findings reviewed for clear error (facts) and abuse of discretion for discretionary calls Applied multifaceted standard: factual findings reviewed for clear error; legal interpretations de novo; sentencing calls for abuse of discretion

Key Cases Cited

  • United States v. Serunjogi, 767 F.3d 132 (1st Cir. 2014) (standard of review for sentencing appeals)
  • United States v. Leahy, 668 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2012) (multifaceted abuse-of-discretion framework)
  • United States v. Burgos-Figueroa, 778 F.3d 319 (1st Cir. 2015) (preponderance standard for sentencing enhancements)
  • United States v. Monteiro, 417 F.3d 208 (1st Cir. 2005) (factors for attributing acts to a single conspiracy)
  • United States v. Demers, 842 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2016) (appellate deference when defendant’s alternative theory is unsupported)
  • United States v. Dunston, 851 F.3d 91 (1st Cir. 2017) (sentencing court’s choice among plausible views not clearly erroneous)
  • United States v. Ruiz, 905 F.2d 499 (1st Cir. 1990) (deference principle where multiple plausible factual views exist)
  • United States v. Savarese, 686 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2012) (recruitment of participants can support managerial-role enhancement)
  • United States v. Ahrendt, 560 F.3d 69 (1st Cir. 2009) (renting an apartment used for drug operations can indicate authority within a conspiracy)
  • United States v. Ofray-Campos, 534 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2008) (scope of role enhancement and control over participants)
  • United States v. García-Morales, 382 F.3d 12 (1st Cir. 2004) (defendant’s responsibility for superintending others supports enhancement)
  • United States v. Casas, 356 F.3d 104 (1st Cir. 2004) (subordination to another conspirator does not preclude leadership finding)
  • United States v. Miranda-Martinez, 790 F.3d 270 (1st Cir. 2015) (co-conspirator firearm possession attributable if reasonably foreseeable)
  • United States v. Greig, 717 F.3d 212 (1st Cir. 2013) (foreseeability test for attributing co-conspirator weapons)
  • United States v. Bianco, 922 F.2d 910 (1st Cir. 1991) (presence of firearms near drugs supports inference weapons used to protect operation)
  • United States v. Corcimiglia, 967 F.2d 724 (1st Cir. 1992) (firearm presence in a drug residence can justify inference weapon protected the drug operation)
  • United States v. Díaz-Arias, 717 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2013) (district courts may consider third-party proffer statements at sentencing)
  • United States v. King, 741 F.3d 305 (1st Cir. 2014) (use of plea agreement, PSR, and transcript as factual basis post-plea)
  • United States v. González-Vélez, 587 F.3d 494 (1st Cir. 2009) (credibility determinations for sentencing left to district court)
Read the full case