United States v. Winbush

264 F. Supp. 2d 1013, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8722, 2003 WL 21212164
CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Florida
DecidedApril 30, 2003
Docket4:02cr49-RH
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 264 F. Supp. 2d 1013 (United States v. Winbush) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Winbush, 264 F. Supp. 2d 1013, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8722, 2003 WL 21212164 (N.D. Fla. 2003).

Opinion

STATEMENT OF REASONS

HINKLE, District Judge.

The grand jury returned a six-count indictment against defendant Johnny Win-bush. He entered a guilty plea to three of the six counts, and the other three counts were dismissed. Mr. Winbush pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (count 4), possession of a firearm in furtherance of the marijuana offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (count 5), and possession of a firearm as a felon with three prior convictions of violent felony or serious drug offenses in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (count 6).

Mr. Winbush was sentenced on April 16, 2003, to a total term of imprisonment of 300 months. This is the mandatory minimum sentence required by sections 924(c) and 924(e), taken together. Mr. Winbush did not contend that a shorter sentence was required, but the government did contend, and the presentence report concluded, that a longer sentence — a sentence of at least 308 months — was required by the United States Sentencing Guidelines. This Statement of Reasons sets forth the basis for the court’s conclusion that the guidelines range that would be applicable to all counts combined, if not for the mandatory mínimums, would be 262 to 327 months, thus making the range of permissible sentences, in light of the mandatory mínimums, a combined total of 300 to 327 *1014 months. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5Gl.l(c)(2) (2002) (requiring imposition of sentence within range but “not less than any statutorily required minimum sentence”)- 1

The starting point of the analysis is the count 5 conviction under § 924(c). For any § 924(c) conviction, there is a mandatory minimum sentence that must be served consecutively to any other sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(D)®. When, as in the case at bar, the firearm at issue is a short-barrel shotgun, the mandatory minimum term is 10 years. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(l)(B)(i).

The United States Sentencing Guidelines address § 924(c) convictions in § 2K2.4. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.4 (2002). Under § 2K2.4(b), the guideline sentence for a § 924(c) conviction is the mandatory minimum sentence, “[e]xcept as provided in” § 2K2.4(c). Section 2K2.4(c) provides:

If the defendant (1) was convicted of violating section 924(c) ... of title 18, United States Code; and (2) as a result of that conviction (alone or in addition to another offense of conviction), is determined to be a career offender under § 4B1.1 (Career Offender), the guideline sentence shall be determined under § 4Bl.l(c). Except for §§ 3E1.1 (Acceptance of Responsibility), 4B1.1, and 4B1.2 (Definitions of Terms Used in Section 4B1.1), Chapters Three and Four shall not apply to that count of conviction.

U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.4(c) (2002). 2 This guideline is precisely applicable in the case at bar: (1) Mr. Winbush was convicted of violating § 924(c); and (2) as a result of that conviction (in addition to the marijuana conviction in count 4), Mr. Winbush is a career offender under § 4B1.1. 3 Thus, under the plain terms of § 2K2.4(c), “the guideline sentence shall be determined under § 4Bl.l(c).” U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.4(c) (2002) (emphasis added).

Under § 4Bl.l(c), if the defendant is convicted under § 924(c) and is determined to be a career offender under § 4Bl.l(a) — precisely the circumstances in Mr. Winbush’s case — then

the applicable guidelines range shall be determined as follows:
(1) If the only count of conviction is 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) ..., the applicable guideline range shall be determined using the table in subsection (c)(3).
(2) In the case of multiple counts of conviction in which at least one of the counts is a conviction other than a conviction for 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) ..., the guideline range shall be the greater of—
(A) the guideline range that results by adding the mandatory mini *1015 mum consecutive penalty required by the 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) ... count(s) to the minimum and the maximum of the otherwise applicable guideline range determined for the count(s) of conviction other than the 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) ... count(s); and
(B) the guideline range determined using the table in subsection (c)(3).
(3) Career Offender Table for 18 U.S.C. § 921(c) ... Offenders
Guideline Range for the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3E1.1 Reduction § 924(c) ... Count(s)
No reduction 360-life
2-level reduction 292-366
3-level reduction 262-327.

U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4Bl.l(e) (2002) (italics added; underlining in original).

By its terms, § 4Bl.l(c)(l) does not apply in the case at bar, because Mr. Win-bush’s § 924(c) conviction is not the “only count of conviction.” Instead, § 4Bl.l(e)(2) applies, because the case involves “multiple counts of conviction in which at least one of the counts is a conviction other than a conviction for 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).” Accordingly, the guideline range “shall be” the greater of the ranges established under subsections (A) and (B) of § 4Bl.l(c)(2). And the range so calculated is clearly the combined range applicable to all of the counts of conviction; otherwise § 4Bl.l(c)(2)(A), which in effect requires that the otherwise applicable ranges for the § 924(c) conviction, on the one hand, and the non § 924(c) convictions, on the other hand, be added together, would make no sense.

Calculating the range under § 4Bl.l(c)(2)(B) is easy.

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

Related

United States v. Black
607 F. Supp. 2d 236 (D. Maine, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
264 F. Supp. 2d 1013, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8722, 2003 WL 21212164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-winbush-flnd-2003.