United States v. Alphonso ShepardUnited States v. Alphonso Shepard
Alphonso Shepard appeals his sentence of 188 months imprisonment after pleading guilty to knowingly and intentionally possessing crack cocaine with the intent to distribute in violation of
The applicability of
Apprendi v. New Jersey
is a pure question of law that we review de novo.
See Doe v. Chiles,
DISCUSSION
The indictment in this case charged Shepard with violating
Based on the Presentence -Investigation Report (PSI) finding Shepard responsible for at least 50 grams of cocaine base, the district court considered and sentenced Shepard under
*1297
We agree with Shepard that
Ap-prendi
dictates, as we stated in
Rogers,
that “drug quantity in
Nonetheless, we affirm Shepard’s sentence and find no need to remand because the district court sentenced Shepard below the twenty year maximum provided by
the State has argued that even without the trial judge’s finding of racial bias, the judge could have imposed consecutive sentences on counts 3 and 18 that would have produced the 12-year term of imprisonment that Apprendi received; Apprendi’s actual sentence was thus within the range authorized by statute for the three offenses to which he pleaded guilty.
Apprendi,
The constitutional question, however, is whether the 12-year sentence imposed on count 18 was permissible, given that it was above the 10-year maximum for the offense charged in that count. The finding is legally significant because it increased—indeed, it doubled'—the maximum range within which the judge could exercise his discretion, converting what otherwise was a maximum 10-year sentence on that count into a minimum sentence. The sentences on counts 3 and 22 have no more relevance to our disposition than the dismissal of the remaining 18 counts.
Id.
This, however, is not the situation before us. The count charged in the indictment, a violation of
AFFIRM.