Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    United States v. Davis, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Curtis Davis Jr. was found guilty by a jury of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, and money laundering. He was sentenced to life in prison for the drug charge and 240 months for the money laundering charge. 2) On appeal, Davis argued that his sentence violated Blakely v. Washington and United States v. Booker because it was based on facts not found by the jury or admitted by him. 3) The court reviewed his claim for harmless error. It found no error because the district court stated it would have given Davis the same sentence even if the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory rather than mandatory. The court therefore affirmed Davis' sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Davis, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views3 pages
    1) Curtis Davis Jr. was found guilty by a jury of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, and money laundering. He was sentenced to life in prison for the drug charge and 240 months for the money laundering charge. 2) On appeal, Davis argued that his sentence violated Blakely v. Washington and United States v. Booker because it was based on facts not found by the jury or admitted by him. 3) The court reviewed his claim for harmless error. It found no error because the district court stated it would have given Davis the same sentence even if the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory rather than mandatory. The court therefore affirmed Davis' sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-02-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-4902

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Curtis Davis Jr. was found guilty by a jury of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, and money laundering. He was sentenced to life in prison for the drug charge and 240 months for the money laundering charge. 2) On appeal, Davis argued that his sentence violated Blakely v. Washington and United States v. Booker because it was based on facts not found by the jury or admitted by him. 3) The court reviewed his claim for harmless error. It found no error because the district court stated it would have given Davis the same sentence even if the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory rather than mandatory. The court therefore affirmed Davis' sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    8 views3 pages

    United States v. Davis, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Curtis Davis Jr. was found guilty by a jury of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, and money laundering. He was sentenced to life in prison for the drug charge and 240 months for the money laundering charge. 2) On appeal, Davis argued that his sentence violated Blakely v. Washington and United States v. Booker because it was based on facts not found by the jury or admitted by him. 3) The court reviewed his claim for harmless error. It found no error because the district court stated it would have given Davis the same sentence even if the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory rather than mandatory. The court therefore affirmed Davis' sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-4902

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CURTIS DAVIS, JR., a/k/a Billy Dee,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
    Patrick Michael Duffy, District
    Judge. (CR-03-391)

    Submitted:

    January 26, 2007

    Decided:

    February 20, 2007

    Before WILLIAMS and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    William N. Nettles, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.


    Jonathan S. Gasser, United States Attorney, Carlton R. Bourne, Jr.,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Curtis

    Davis,

    Jr.,

    was

    found

    guilty

    by

    jury

    of

    conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distributing


    five kilograms or more of cocaine and fifty grams or more of
    cocaine

    base

    (Count

    1)

    and

    money

    1956(a)(1) (2000) (Count 11).

    laundering

    under

    18

    U.S.C.

    Adopting the recommendations in

    the presentence report, the district court sentenced Davis to a


    life sentence for Count 1 and a 240-month concurrent sentence for
    Count 11.

    At the sentencing hearing, the district court stated

    that, even if the Federal Sentencing Guidelines were to be found


    nonbinding,
    sentence.

    (J.A.

    3553(a)

    judgment.

    it

    (West

    would
    59).
    2000

    give
    The

    &

    Davis

    court

    Supp.

    an

    identical

    referenced

    2006)

    factors

    alternative

    the

    18

    U.S.C.A.

    in

    its

    criminal

    On appeal, Davis alleges he was sentenced in violation

    of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), and United States v.


    Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).

    For the reasons that follow, we

    affirm.
    Davis alleges that he was sentenced based on facts not
    found by the jury or admitted by him in violation of Blakely and
    Booker. Because Davis timely objected on this basis in the district
    court, we review his claim for harmless error.*

    United States v.

    Rodriguez, 433 F.3d 411, 415-16 (4th Cir. 2006); United States v.

    We offer no criticism of the district judge, who followed the


    law and procedure in effect at the time Davis was sentenced.
    - 2 -

    Mackins, 315 F.3d 399, 405 (4th Cir. 2003).

    We find no harmless

    error, however, as the district court stated it would have given


    Davis an identical sentence even if the Sentencing Guidelines were
    found to be advisory.

    United States v. Shatley, 448 F.3d 264,

    267-68 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 310 (2006) (holding that
    in light of district courts finding that it would impose an
    identical alternative sentence, any Sixth Amendment Booker error was
    harmless).
    Accordingly, we affirm Davis 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

    - 3 -

    You might also like