United States v. Wynn, 37 F.4th 63

Defendant Rashawn Wynn pleaded guilty to a RICO conspiracy based on membership in the Syracuse-based "110 Gang" and five street-level sales totaling 42.2 grams of crack cocaine.
The drug sales occurred in a seven-month span and produced under $2,500; Wynn admitted the sales but was not charged with or shown to have participated in the gang’s violent or financial crimes.
The PSR described extensive gang activity over 2012–2018, including multiple shootings, routine firearms use, and other members’ leadership roles; Wynn was incarcerated for four of the six years in the indictment period.
Probation set a base offense level of 24, imposed a two-level §2D1.1(b)(1) weapons enhancement based on the gang’s routine firearm use, and subtracted three levels for acceptance, yielding offense level 23 and a Guidelines range of 92–115 months.
The district court adopted the PSR, applied the two-level weapons enhancement, denied a §3B1.2 mitigating-role reduction, and sentenced Wynn to 92 months’ imprisonment.
On appeal Wynn challenged (1) the weapons enhancement and (2) the denial of a mitigating-role adjustment; the Second Circuit affirmed the enhancement but vacated and remanded for resentencing because the court’s denial of a role reduction lacked adequate analysis.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Government)	Defendant's Argument (Wynn)	Held
Whether a two-level §2D1.1(b)(1) weapons enhancement may apply when other conspiracy members used firearms	Enhancement proper because 110 Gang routinely used firearms in furtherance of the drug conspiracy and firearm possession was reasonably foreseeable to Wynn	Enhancement improper because Wynn did not personally possess or know of any firearms	Affirmed — enhancement may be applied where firearm possession was reasonably foreseeable; Wynn did not contest foreseeability on appeal
Whether Wynn was entitled to a mitigating-role reduction under §3B1.2 based on limited participation	Wynn was a long-time gang member and not less culpable than other members; no entitlement to reduction	Wynn’s role was limited: five small sales, no planning, no decisionmaking, not involved in violence or financial crimes, and incarcerated much of the conspiracy period	Vacated and remanded — district court’s denial was cursory and failed to analyze the §3B1.2 factors relative to co-participants; resentencing required

United States v. Batista, 684 F.3d 333 (2d Cir. 2012) (weapons enhancement may apply based on reasonable foreseeability in a narcotics conspiracy)
United States v. Miller, 116 F.3d 641 (2d Cir. 1997) (RICO base offense level governed by underlying racketeering activity)
United States v. Ivezaj, 568 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2009) (Chapter Three role adjustments for RICO convictions are based on role in the overall enterprise)
United States v. Gershman, 31 F.4th 80 (2d Cir. 2022) (reaffirming Ivezaj approach for Chapter Three adjustments in RICO cases)
United States v. Cramer, 777 F.3d 597 (2d Cir. 2015) (standard of review: application of Guidelines de novo; factual findings for clear error)
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 (1985) (clear-error standard for factual findings)
United States v. Carpenter, 252 F.3d 230 (2d Cir. 2001) (defendant bears burden to show entitlement to mitigating-role adjustment)
United States v. Alston, 899 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2018) (focus on defendant’s relative culpability among co-participants for role adjustments)
United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2008) (district court must adequately explain sentence to permit meaningful review)
United States v. Park, 758 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 2014) (sentencing explanation must show consideration of Guidelines and statutory factors)