United States v. Johnson

305 F. Supp. 3d 137
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedApril 30, 2018
DocketCriminal Action No. 02–0310 (JDB)
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 305 F. Supp. 3d 137 (United States v. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Johnson, 305 F. Supp. 3d 137 (D.C. Cir. 2018).

Opinion

JOHN D. BATES, United States District Judge

Before the Court is [38] Johnson's motion for a sentence modification under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). For the following reasons, the motion will be denied.

On June 19, 2002, members of the Metropolitan Police Department were patrolling in the 400 block of K Street, SE, in Washington, DC. See Compl. & Statement of Facts [ECF No. 1]. Upon seeing the police officers, Johnson ran away, clutching his waistband; as he ran, he was observed throwing a pink object into the bushes. Id. Johnson was stopped, and police recovered a number of small pink bags containing a white powder and substance, which field-tested positive for opiates, and a loaded semiautomatic handgun. Id. A search of the defendant also revealed $543.25 and three hand-rolled cigarettes containing illicit drug material. Id.

Johnson was charged with three counts: (1) unlawful possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) ; (2) using, carrying, and possessing a firearm during a drug trafficking offense, in violation of *13818 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) ; and (3) unlawful possession of a firearm by a person convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment of one year or more, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). See Indictment [ECF No. 6] at 1-2.

Following a jury trial, Johnson was found guilty on all counts. See Judgment [ECF No. 27] at 1. At the time of his sentencing, the applicable Guidelines range for Johnson was 262 to 327 months of imprisonment. Id. at 6. Johnson was sentenced in February 2003 to 322 months' incarceration. Id. at 2. The Court imposed a sentence of 262 months on the heroin possession offense; 120 months' incarceration on the felon-in-possession offense, to run concurrently with the heroin count; and 60 months' incarceration for possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking offense, to run consecutively to the other counts. Id. at 2. The Court ordered Johnson's sentence to be followed by a period of six years' supervised release for the heroin possession, and three years' supervised release on the other counts, to run concurrently. Id. at 3.

On May 9, 2017, Johnson filed a petition to modify his term of imprisonment. See Pet. for Modification of an Imposed Term of Imprisonment Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) ("Def.'s Mot.") [ECF No. 38] at 1. He claims that he qualifies for a sentence reduction for Count One pursuant to the Sentencing Commission's Amendment 782, because he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment based upon a sentencing range that was subsequently lowered by the Sentencing Commission. See Def.'s Mot. at 1-2. Amendment 782 reduces by two the base offense levels assigned to drug quantities in the Drug Quantity Table in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c), which effectively lowers the Guidelines' minimum sentences for drug offenses. See U.S.S.G. supp. to app. C, amend 782. The Amendment became effective on November 1, 2014 and applies retroactively. Id.

Johnson's claim, however, fails for two reasons. First, Johnson received a career offender enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, because he was at least eighteen years of age at the time of this conviction, the instant offense of conviction is a felony that is either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense, and he had at least two prior convictions of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense. U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a) ; see Sentencing Tr. [ECF No. 33] at 5:12-:18. The base offense level on Count Three-possession of a firearm by a person convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment by one year or more, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) -was 24. U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2) ; see Sentencing Tr. at 4:4-:8. Johnson then received a ten-level enhancement for Counts One and Three, which brought the adjusted offense level to 34.1 U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a)(1) ; see Sentencing Tr. at 5:12-:24. Because Johnson received the career offender enhancement, his base offense level, and therefore his sentencing guideline, was based on § 4B1.1, rather than on the drug quantity table in § 2D1.1. Amendment 782 therefore does not apply to him, because the amendment did not affect § 4B1.1. See, e.g., United States v. Quintanilla, 868 F.3d 315, 320 & n.8 (5th Cir. 2017) (collecting cases), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1283, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (2018).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lee v. Flower Karaoke
E.D. New York, 2023

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
305 F. Supp. 3d 137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-johnson-cadc-2018.