Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 0 views

    United States v. Winston Carl Brown, 94 F.3d 642, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The defendant appealed his 108-month sentence for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that the district court should have granted a downward departure based on the Sentencing Commission's proposed amendment to the sentencing guidelines for crack offenses. However, the Fourth Circuit previously held that a proposed amendment does not indicate the guidelines failed to adequately consider the crack/powder cocaine distinction, and that the broad issue of appropriate crack offense levels does not justify individual downward departures. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision that the proposed amendment was not a valid basis for departure.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States v. Winston Carl Brown, 94 F.3d 642, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    The defendant appealed his 108-month sentence for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that the district court should have granted a downward departure based on the Sentencing Commission's proposed amendment to the sentencing guidelines for crack offenses. However, the Fourth Circuit previously held that a proposed amendment does not indicate the guidelines failed to adequately consider the crack/powder cocaine distinction, and that the broad issue of appropriate crack offense levels does not justify individual downward departures. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision that the proposed amendment was not a valid basis for departure.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-08-19 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 94 F.3d 642 Docket: 95-5905

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The defendant appealed his 108-month sentence for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that the district court should have granted a downward departure based on the Sentencing Commission's proposed amendment to the sentencing guidelines for crack offenses. However, the Fourth Circuit previously held that a proposed amendment does not indicate the guidelines failed to adequately consider the crack/powder cocaine distinction, and that the broad issue of appropriate crack offense levels does not justify individual downward departures. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision that the proposed amendment was not a valid basis for departure.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    0 views2 pages

    United States v. Winston Carl Brown, 94 F.3d 642, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The defendant appealed his 108-month sentence for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that the district court should have granted a downward departure based on the Sentencing Commission's proposed amendment to the sentencing guidelines for crack offenses. However, the Fourth Circuit previously held that a proposed amendment does not indicate the guidelines failed to adequately consider the crack/powder cocaine distinction, and that the broad issue of appropriate crack offense levels does not justify individual downward departures. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision that the proposed amendment was not a valid basis for departure.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    94 F.

    3d 642

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) 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.
    Winston Carl BROWN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 95-5905.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted July 25, 1996.
    Decided Aug. 19, 1996.

    Charles D. Luckey, BLANCO, TACKABERY, COMBS &


    MATAMOROS, P.A., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant.
    Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Lisa B. Boggs, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    PER CURIAM:

    OPINION
    1

    Winston Carl Brown appeals the 108-month sentence he received after he pled
    guilty to possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C.A. S
    841 (West 1981 & Supp.1996). He contends that the district court failed to
    recognize its authority to depart downward because of the Sentencing
    Commission's proposal to amend the sentencing guideline pertaining to crack
    offenses. USSG S 2D1.1.* We affirm.

    While Brown's appeal was pending, this court held that the proposed revision
    does not mean that the Sentencing Commission failed adequately to consider
    the distinction between crack and powder cocaine when USSG S 2D1.1 was
    formulated. United States v. Ambers, --- F.3d ---, 1996 WL 288946 (4th Cir.
    June 3, 1996). In addition, Ambers holds that "the broad issue of proper
    sentencing levels for crack offenses does not involve the sort of individual,
    mitigating circumstance justifying a departure." Id. Consequently, the district
    court did not err in holding that the proposed amendment was not a basis for
    departure.

    We therefore affirm the sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the
    facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual (Nov.1995)

    You might also like