United States v. Jeremy Roberts

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
• Decided: October 22, 2020
• Docket: 19-6337
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 20a0602n.06

No. 19-6337

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Oct 22, 2020 ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE v. ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT ) COURT FOR THE EASTERN JEREMY ROBERTS, ) DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE ) Defendant-Appellant. ) )

Before: McKEAGUE, THAPAR, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges.

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. Jeremy Roberts pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a

felon. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(3), the district court increased his Sentencing Guidelines

base offense level due to a prior conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to

deliver or sell in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417(a)(4). Roberts challenges the district

court’s conclusion, arguing that under United States v. Havis, 927 F.3d 382 (6th Cir. 2019) (en

banc), his prior conviction does not qualify as a “controlled substance offense” under the

Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b). After Roberts filed his appellate brief, a panel of this court

addressed this very argument and rejected it. See United States v. Garth, 965 F.3d 493, 495–99

(6th Cir. 2020) (holding that possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver or sell in

violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417(a)(4) qualifies as a “controlled substance offense” under

U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b)). Persuaded by Garth’s analysis (and bound by it, in any event), Roberts’

prior conviction qualifies as a controlled substance offense, and the district court did not err in

calculating his base offense level. We AFFIRM.