USA v. Alejos Cardenas, 00-1177

Citation217 F.3d 491
Decision Date23 June 2000
Docket NumberNo. 00-1177,00-1177
Parties(7th Cir. 2000) United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alejos Cardenas, Defendant-Appellant
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. No. IP 99-76-CR T/F--John D. Tinder, Judge.

Before Posner, Chief Judge, and Bauer and Diane P. Wood, Circuit Judges.

Bauer, Circuit Judge.

On January 7, 2000, Alejos Cardenas pled guilty to two counts of possessing a handgun in violation of 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(g). The district court sentenced him to a term of imprisonment of 180 months and 5 years of supervised release. In computing Cardenas' sentence, the district court found that Cardenas qualified for an enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(e)(1). The ACCA mandates a minimum sentence of fifteen years for a defendant with three prior serious drug convictions, who is subsequently convicted for unlawful possession of a firearm. Cardenas had three prior convictions for selling crack cocaine. The convictions included two sales of crack cocaine to confidential informants on March 27, 1995, one at 8:00 p.m. and the other at 8:45 p.m. and a third the following day at 9:00 p.m. The district court concluded that each sale constituted a separate and distinct criminal episode. Cardenas disagrees, arguing that the sales on March 27 constituted a single predicate offense under the ACCA.

We review whether the district court violated the statute in its sentencing determination de novo. United States v. Williams, 68 F.3d 168, 169 (7th Cir. 1995).

Title 18, United States Code, Section 924(e)(1) provides that: In the case of a person who violates section 922(g) of this title and has three previous convictions by any court referred to in section 922(g)(1) of this title for a violent felony or a serious drug offense, or both, committed on occasions different from one another, such person shall be fined not more than $25,000 and imprisoned not less than fifteen years. . .

In United States v. Hudspeth, 42 F.3d 1015, 1019 (7th Cir. 1995) (en banc), the court examined the "committed on occasions different from one another" language of sec. 924(e)(1). The court concluded that it is necessary "to look to the nature of the crimes, the identities of the victims, and the locations." Id. Additionally, we must ask whether the defendant had sufficient time to cease and desist or withdraw from the criminal activity. Id.; Williams, at 171.

In Hudspeth, the defendants, in a span of thirty-five minutes, burglarized three separate businesses at the Laketown Shopping Center. Id. at 1022. The burglars first entered the cleaners. Next they used a sledge hammer to break the adjoining wall to gain entrance into the doughnut shop. Finally, they forced the door of the adjacent insurance company open. Id. The court found that each unlawful entry was a separate and distinct episode. Before entry into the second and third businesses, the defendants had the chance to stop the criminal...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • United States v. Elliott, 11–2766.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • December 20, 2012
    ...involved distinct criminal aggressions from which [defendant] had an opportunity to cease and withdraw”); United States v. Cardenas, 217 F.3d 491, 492 (7th Cir.2000) (three sales of crack cocaine to informants over two days, with two sales taking place only 45 minutes and half a block apart......
  • Kirkland v. United States , 11–2507.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • July 24, 2012
    ...and location, involved distinct criminal aggressions from which he had an opportunity to cease and withdraw.”); United States v. Cardenas, 217 F.3d 491, 492 (7th Cir.2000) ( “In this case, the two sales of crack cocaine on March 27 were two separate and distinct episodes. While Cardenas sol......
  • Charlton v. United States
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. District of Massachusetts
    • June 20, 2019
    ...other circuits has deemed two sales as separate predicates with brief time spans between the sales. See, e.g., United States v. Cardenas, 217 F.3d 491, 492 (7th Cir. 2000) (finding two sales of cocaine to same police informants 45 minutes and half a block apart constituted separate ACCA pre......
  • United States v. Hansford
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • October 7, 2021
    ...773, 775 (6th Cir. 2018) ; Ky. Rev. Stat. § 508.020 (2002) (requiring intent to cause physical injury); see also United States v. Cardenas , 217 F.3d 491, 492 (7th Cir. 2000). He thus qualifies as an armed career criminal. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B). His constitutional argument is foreclo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT