United States v. Anderson

• Decision Date: 04 August 2015
• Docket Number: Nos. 14–5741,14–5742.,s. 14–5741
• Citation: 795 F.3d 613
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Lameisha ANDERSON, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

795 F.3d 613

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee

v.Lameisha ANDERSON, Defendant–Appellant.

Nos. 14–5741

14–5742.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Argued: Jan. 23, 2015.

Decided and Filed: Aug. 4, 2015.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 21, 2015.

ARGUED:James G. Thomas, Neal & Harwell, PLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Van S. Vincent, United States Attorney's Office, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee. ON BRIEF:James G. Thomas, William T. Ramsey, L. Wells Trompeter, Neal & Harwell, PLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Van S. Vincent, United States Attorney's Office, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

Before: MERRITT, MOORE, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.

MERRITT, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which MOORE and DONALD, JJ., joined. MERRITT, J. (pp. 618–19), delivered a separate concurring opinion.

OPINION

MERRITT, Circuit Judge.

The primary question in this sentencing appeal is whether the defendant, Lameisha Anderson, had the requisite intent to be held responsible for the murder of Sharon Duran by Jamal Shakir under the “murder cross-reference” enhancement of U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(d).¹

The government argues that under the “relevant conduct” section of the guidelines, U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B),² it need only prove that the possibility of the murder was “reasonably foreseeable,” not that Anderson had knowledge that Shakir intended to murder Duran. The district court found, however, that Anderson had “actual knowledge” that Shakir intended to commit the murder and that Anderson acted as an accomplice. This finding was not clearly erroneous.

Anderson was the girlfriend of Shakir, the violent leader of a large Los Angeles drug conspiracy that operated in Tennessee, as well as other states, from 1992 through 1997. Anderson was active in the conspiracy for approximately three years, ending with her arrest in September 1997. She was not indicted for murder, but pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). Anderson challenges her sentence on appeal, arguing that the district court erred in applying the “murder cross- reference” guideline enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(d)(1), and the three-level enhancement for her role as a “manager or supervisor” in the conspiracy.

I.

Although there are many incidents documenting the wide-ranging and violent nature of the conspiracy, we will focus on those incidents in which the government alleges that Anderson was directly involved and those that bear on the challenges she makes to her sentence. After pleading guilty, Anderson signed a plea agreement in 1999, and the government agreed to file a substantial assistance motion for a reduction of sentence if Anderson would testify against her boyfriend, conspiracy leader Shakir. Shakir did not go to trial until 2007, ten years after Anderson was arrested. He was convicted of nine murders after a long trial presided over by Judge John Nixon in Nashville and sentenced to life in prison. Judge Nixon also sentenced Anderson in this case. Anderson was held in pretrial detention throughout this period. Anderson did in fact testify at length as a government witness at Shakir's trial, but the government withdrew the plea agreement because it claims that Anderson did not tell the truth about her role in the murder of Sharon Duran in California in 1995. Prior to Shakir's trial, the government determined that Anderson had knowingly withheld information or provided false information concerning the murder of Duran. It therefore revoked the plea agreement and decided not to file a motion for downward departure based on substantial assistance.

Anderson was not sentenced until June 4, 2014, 15 years after she signed the plea agreement. The record is not clear about how and why this extraordinary delay in sentencing occurred. A presentence report was prepared in October 2001 and revised in April 2014. Anderson received a base offense level of 34 based on 1.5 kilograms of crack attributed to the conspiracy. Presentence Report ¶ 39. The probation officer increased the base offense level from 34 to 43 by applying the cross-reference to first-degree murder, found in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(d)(1), based on the murder of Sharon Duran by Shakir in 1995. Presentence Report ¶¶ 41–42. Anderson was also given enhancements for possession of a firearm in connection with a conspiracy, her role as a manager, the use of juveniles, and obstruction of justice. After subtracting three levels for acceptance of responsibility, the final offense level was 47. This level calls for life imprisonment regardless of the defendant's criminal history category.³ Presentence Report ¶¶ 39–50. Anderson, however, could not be sentenced to more than the statutory maximum of 30 years for her conviction for drug trafficking under 21 U.S.C. § 846.

Anderson filed objections to the presentence report challenging the application of the murder cross-reference guideline in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(d)(1), arguing that the facts did not support application of the cross-reference for murder. She also objected to the imposition of a three-level enhancement for her role as a “manager or supervisor” in the conspiracy pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b).⁴ At the sentencing hearing, the government urged a sentence of 30 years, the statutory maximum for the drug conspiracy charge, while defense counsel urged that Anderson be sentenced to time served, which was almost 17 years at that time. The district court sentenced Anderson to 288 months (24 years) on the drug charge, approximately the midpoint between the two sentencing requests, and 240 months on the money laundering charge, to run concurrently.

The district court overruled Anderson's objections, finding by a preponderance of the evidence that she had “actual knowledge” that Shakir planned to murder Duran. Sentencing Hr'g Tr. at 18–19. The district court also found Anderson played a management role, relying on paragraphs 9, 11 and 13 of the presentence report. Id. at 19. No fact witnesses testified, and the district court made no specific findings of fact beyond relying on the presentence report.

II.

A. Murder of Sharon Duran and Application of the Murder Cross–Reference

Anderson argues that the district court should not have applied the cross-reference for first-degree murder—raising her base offense level from 34 to 43—because the district court failed to make any specific findings supporting the application of the enhancement and, in any event, the evidence did not support application of the cross-reference for murder. To establish first-degree murder under 18 U.S.C. § 1111, there must be evidence that Shakir killed Duran with “malice aforethought.” The question before us is whether Anderson must have shared in that intent.

Shakir murdered Duran on December 13, 1995, in Los Angeles. Several months before her death, Duran had accompanied another member of the conspiracy to locate and move a Cadillac involved in the murder of Solomon Harris. Duran feared she might be tied to Harris's murder through the Cadillac. Anderson met Duran at a bar in Los Angeles on the night of Duran's murder and Duran told Anderson of her fear of being tied to Harris's murder. Anderson reported Duran's statements to Shakir, and Shakir told Anderson to call Duran and set up a meeting later that night. Anderson then drove Shakir to meet Duran outside Duran's apartment building. Shakir got into Duran's car with Duran and instructed Anderson to follow them. Anderson followed them to a side street where Shakir then instructed Anderson to pull her car up ahead of Duran's. Shakir then shot Duran and left the scene in Anderson's car. Presentence report ¶¶ 15–16. Anderson denies that she knew that Shakir was going to kill Duran. Trial Tr. at 4398 (Oct. 31, 2007).

Anderson objected to the application of the first-degree murder cross-reference to her drug conspiracy count because she “did not knowingly participate in the murder of Sharon Duran” and Shakir “did not share his plan to kill Duran with her.” Objections to Presentence Report at 1. The government responded that specific intent is not necessary because the “relevant conduct” guideline in § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) establishes the lesser “reasonable foreseeability” standard.

After hearing from both sides at the sentencing hearing, the district court specifically found that the evidence supported a finding that Anderson had “actual knowledge” of Duran's murder and applied the murder cross-reference enhancement. The court did not rely on the lesser “reasonably foreseeable” standard. Sentencing Tr. at 18 (“I'm going to make a finding that [Duran's murder] was in furtherance of the conspiracy and goes beyond reasonable foreseeability to actual knowledge.”). As discussed below, we hold that the district court's factual finding that Anderson had “actual knowledge” that Shakir intended to kill Duran was not clear error, as Anderson's knowledge may be inferred from her substantial participation in the course of events before and after Duran's murder. Actual knowledge necessarily satisfies the lesser reasonable-foreseeability standard. Thus, we assume without deciding that the government was required to prove actual knowledge and affirm the district court's decision that Anderson had that intent.

A reasonable inference may be drawn from the facts relied on by the district court that Anderson knew of Shakir's plan to murder Duran and facilitated it. Anderson admitted that she talked to Duran the night Duran was murdered about Shakir's previous murder of Harris and discussed the meeting with Shakir. Based on this, it appears that Shakir decided to kill Duran. Anderson immediately followed Shakir's instruction to drive him to meet Duran. The two left the murder scene together with Anderson driving her car. Anderson advised Shakir of Duran's statements concerning the previous murder of Harris, drove him in her...