United States v. Eddie Williams

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-4121

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Eddie Williams, Jr., * * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: April 23, 1998

Filed: April 24, 1998

___________

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After Eddie Williams, Jr. pleaded guilty to possessing “cocaine base, aka #crack cocaine,&” with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), the district court1 sentenced him to 70 months imprisonment and four years supervised release. Mr. Williams now appeals, and we affirm.

1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Mr. Williams argues that the 100-to-1 ratio used in establishing sentencing ranges for crack versus powder cocaine offenses denies him due process and equal protection, and is inappropriate based on medical authority, the rule of lenity, and policy considerations. Mr. Williams&s challenge is foreclosed by our prior decisions upholding the constitutionality of the 100-to-1 ratio. See, e.g., United States v. Carter, 91 F.3d 1196, 1197-99 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam); United States v. Jackson, 67 F.3d 1359, 1367 (8th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1192 (1996); see also United States v. Jackson, 64 F.3d 1213, 1220 (8th Cir. 1995) (rejecting challenge based on rule of lenity), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1137 (1996). We are bound by those decisions. See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 660 (8th Cir.) (one Eighth Circuit panel may not overrule another panel&s decision), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 84 (1997).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.