United States v. Michael Chambers

940 F.2d 653, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23491, 1991 WL 137232
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 29, 1991·No. 90-5664·Unpublished·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

940 F.2d 653
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Michael CHAMBERS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-5664.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued Feb. 4, 1991.
Decided July 29, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., District Judge. (CR-88-67-N)

James Orlando Broccoletti, Zoby & Broccoletti, Norfolk, Va., for appellant.

William G. Otis, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Va. (Argued), for appellee; Henry E. Hudson, United States Attorney, Laura M. Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Va., on brief.

E.D.Va. [APPEAL AFTER REMAND FROM 898 F.2D 148].

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and JAMES B. McMILLAN, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of North Carolina, sitting by designation.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Michael P. Chambers was convicted of six counts of involuntary manslaughter pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Secs. 7, 1112 & 3238. The district court sentenced Chambers to 120 months of imprisonment and one year of supervised release.1 Chambers argues that the district court improperly departed from the sentencing range proposed under the Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm.

Chambers' conviction arose from an automobile accident that occurred on April 30, 1988 on the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba. A patrolman observed Chambers driving at approximately forty miles per hour in a twenty-five miles per hour zone and attempted to pull him over. A two mile chase ensued, during which Chambers accelerated to estimated speeds of between 100 and 110 miles per hour and failed to stop for two stop signs and a red light. Chambers' car then collided with a Navy Exchange van carrying nine off-duty servicemen and a civilian driver. The impact of this collision caused the van to become airborne and catch on fire. As a result, six of the van's occupants were killed and three others were seriously injured. Chambers, who received only minor injuries, was found to have a blood alcohol level of .218.

In response to the government's motion for an upward departure from the sentencing range proposed under the Sentencing Guidelines, the district court ordered that Chambers be imprisoned for a period of 120 months. The court properly noted that 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553(b) provides for upward departures if there is a determination that the case involves aggravating circumstances "not adequately taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission." Our review of this decision is based on 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3742(f)(2), which states in pertinent part that "[i]f the court of appeals determines that the sentence ... is outside the applicable guidelines range and is unreasonable ... it shall set aside the sentence and remand the case for further sentencing proceedings...."

As the first steps in our review of the reasonableness of the district court's departure, we must determine whether the court properly identified aggravating circumstances and ascertained whether these circumstances actually existed in Chambers' case. See United States v. Wright, 924 F.2d 545, 547 (4th Cir.1991); United States v. Chester, 919 F.2d 896, 901 (4th Cir.1990). In this regard, the district court stated that it relied upon the circumstances identified in U.S.S.G. section 4A1.3 (prior sentences and similar misconduct not used in computing the criminal history category), section 5K2.9 (criminal purpose to conceal commission of another offense), section 5K2.14 (endangering national security, public health, or safety), section 5K2.8 (defendant's extreme conduct), and section 5K2.0 (general departure provision).

The district court made findings indicating that these aggravating circumstances were presented by the facts of Chambers' case. It found that Chambers had two prior convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol and several speeding tickets, all of which occurred at the naval base. As military offenses, these circumstances were not taken into account in calculating Chambers' criminal history category under the Guidelines. The district court also found that Chambers had attempted to avoid arrest, and thereby presumably conceal his drunk driving offense and the fact that he was driving on a suspended license, by fleeing from the base security officers. Similarly, the court found that this attempted escape involved driving at speeds of in excess of 100 miles per hour, an act which endangered the health and safety of all those traveling in the vicinity as motorists or pedestrians. Finally, the court found that Chambers' conduct in driving drunk on a suspended license despite prior convictions for drunk driving, in attempting to escape the base security authorities, in traveling in excess of 100 miles per hour, and in killing or injuring nine people was extreme, heinous, and egregious. On the basis of the record before us, we conclude that the district court was not clearly erroneous in finding that the aggravating circumstances it identified were presented by the facts of this case. See Chester, 919 F.2d at 900; United States v. Hummer, 916 F.2d 186, 192 (4th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 59 U.S.L.W. 3702 (1991).

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

United States v. Michael Chambers, 940 F.2d 653, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23491, 1991 WL 137232 (4th Cir. 1991).

940 F.2d 653 (United States v. Michael Chambers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Willette Whiteskunk
162 F.3d 1244 (Tenth Circuit, 1998)
United States v. Whiteskunk
Tenth Circuit, 1998