US v. Brown, Crim. No. 3-89-002(03).
| Decision Date | 30 June 1989 |
| Docket Number | Crim. No. 3-89-002(03). |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Carlton Bernard BROWN, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota |
Nathan P. Petterson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Minneapolis, Minn., for plaintiff.
Mark W. Peterson, Minneapolis, Minn., for defendant.
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR IMPOSING SENTENCE
There being no objections to the factual statements contained in the presentence investigation report (PSI), the court adopts those statements as its findings of fact.
Carlton Brown is a young man who has not yet reached his twenty-first birthday. Despite his youth, Brown has been involved in a life of crime for several years. His criminal record reflects a disrespect for the law and a pervasive association with the distribution of cocaine. Just punishment, incapacitation and deterrence are all important factors in the sentencing of this defendant. The driving force behind this sentence is the career offender provision of the guidelines, the application of which is discussed below. Another concern is proportionality, and the court notes that Brown's two co-defendants received 24 and 27 months of imprisonment respectively for their roles in this offense.
The only disputed issue with respect to Brown's sentencing guidelines calculations is whether Brown qualifies as a career offender under guideline § 4B1.1. This section provides:
A defendant is a career offender if (1) the defendant was at least eighteen years old at the time of the instant offense, (2) the instant offense of conviction is a felony that is either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense, and (3) the defendant has at least two prior felony convictions of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense.
Brown concedes that he has committed two prior controlled substance felonies. However, he contends that his conviction for transportation of a narcotic controlled substance on September 11, 1986, does not fit the definition of "controlled substance offense" under § 4B1.1. The term "controlled substance offense" is defined in guideline § 4B1.2 to mean "an offense identified in 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 845b, 856, 952(a), 955, 955a, 959; and similar offenses." Although Brown was convicted under a California statute, Health and Safety Code § 11352, the offense is indisputably similar to the federal crimes specified in § 4B1.2. Authorities apprehended Brown at the Los Angeles Airport with 40.9 grams of cocaine packaged for sale. Brown admitted that he intended to sell the drugs. This offense is similar to possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, which is prohibited by 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
Having made these findings, the court determines that the applicable guidelines are:
Total Offense Level: 32
Criminal History Score: Category VI
Applicable Guideline Range: 210-262
months
IV. Sentence
V. Statement of Reasons
The court imposes sentence within the range applicable to this defendant and for this offense because the facts found are of the kind contemplated by the guidelines and because a sentence within the range is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Brown
...responsibility lightly but realizes that Congress and the Sentencing Commission have spoken emphatically on this subject. 9 United States v. Brown, 715 F.Supp. 261, Statement of Reasons for Imposing Sentence 3-4, No. 3-89-002(03) (June 30, 1989). We hold the guidelines are not as restrictiv......