4th Circuit tosses longer sentence in NC case of felon gun possession

The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals has thrown out a 15-year prison sentence for a North Carolina man convicted of being a felon possessing a gun. The split 2-1 ruling faulted the trial judge’s handling of issues linked to the Armed Career Criminal Act.

Under the appellate decision released Monday, Donald Craig Melvin will be resentenced to no more than 10 years behind bars.

When Melvin pleaded guilty to one count of gun possession by a felon, the federal Probation Office prepared a presentencing report, according to the majority opinion. The PSR identified four prior convictions that could have served as legal predicates qualifying Melvin for an enhanced prison sentence under the ACCA.

Three of the four predicates, “serious drug offenses or violent felonies,” would be necessary for an ACCA “enhancement.” The enhancement would transform a case with a 10-year maximum prison sentence into one with a 15-year minimum sentence.

But the 4th Circuit criticized US District Judge Louise Flanagan’s handling of the ACCA issues.

“Melvin prevailed on objections to two of the four predicates, seemingly leaving him one short of qualifying for a mandatory sentencing enhancement under ACCA,” wrote Judge Roger Gregory for the Appeals Court majority. “But at the sentencing hearing, the Government proposed a new predicate which it had not raised prior.”

“After granting a continuance, the district court accepted the proposed predicate offense and applied the ACCA enhancement to Melvin’s sentence,” Gregory added. “Because the district court’s actions violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 and United States v. Hodge, we vacate Melvin’s sentence and remand for resentencing without the ACCA enhancement.”

The 4th Circuit faulted prosecutors for failing to object to the presentence report.

“We have made abundantly clear that courts must hold the Government to the same standards that it holds a defendant,” Gregory wrote. “Generally, if a defendant fails to object to material information within the presentence report within 14 days, the defendant is barred from raising objections at a later date.”

“Nothing in Rule 32, which sets schedules for ‘parties[’]’ objections, suggests that district courts may give the Government special treatment with respect to the 14-day deadline,” Gregory added. “Nor does it qualify as ‘good cause’ to extend the 14-day deadline that the Government has an earnest desire to register a third ACCA predicate.”

“Permitting the Government to belatedly raise a new predicate ‘would do a disservice to the efforts’ of the sentencing court and the defense counsel, who constructed their sentencing strategy and expectations on the unimpeachable assumption that the Government had no objections to the presentence report,” the majority opinion explained. “When a party is aware of an argument in its favor, and elects — strategically — not to raise it within the time required, it can rarely overcome that forfeiture.”

“Because there was no good cause argued, and no good cause found to permit extension of the Rule 32 period to object to the presentence report, it was error for the district court to permit the Government to introduce a new potential ACCA predicate,” Gregory wrote.

Judge DeAndrea Gist Benjamin joined Gregory’s opinion. Both were appointed by Democratic presidents. Judge Steven Agee, a Republican appointee, dissented.

“The majority opinion imposes burdens on both the district court and the Government that the federal rules, Supreme Court case law, and circuit precedent do not demand of them,” Agee wrote. “In so doing, the majority arbitrarily wrests control over sentencing hearings away from the entity that is in the best position to weigh the merits and equities of the parties’ arguments when it sentences a defendant.”

“And it again positions this Court as an outlier among our sister circuits,” Agee added. “The record before us shows that the district court took great care before sentencing Melvin, and its actions afforded him all the process he was due.”

“Under the circumstances presented, the district court did not abuse its discretion in excusing the Government’s failure to object to the PSR’s listing of ACCA predicates and permitting it to raise a new potential ACCA predicate at the sentencing hearing,” the dissent continued. “But even assuming that decision constituted procedural error (it was not), Melvin incurred no prejudice because the district court simultaneously continued sentencing to permit an updated PSR and additional briefing by both parties before reconvening to hear further arguments, determine that Melvin was an armed career criminal, calculate his Guidelines range, and impose an ACCA-based sentence.”

“Because no error — let alone a reversible one — occurred below, I would affirm Melvin’s sentence,” Agee wrote.

“4th Circuit tosses longer sentence in NC case of felon gun possession” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.