Hinton v. United States

3 Citing cases

  1. U.S. v. Woodyard

    349 F. App'x 518 (11th Cir. 2009)   Cited 1 times

    On appeal, this Court affirmed Woodyard's convictions, but vacated his sentences because there was no evidence establishing that Woodyard had been a member of the drug conspiracy at the time of Johns' death. See United States v. Westry, 524 F.3d 1198, 1220-21 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, Carter v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 251, 172 L.Ed.2d 189 (2008), and Hinton v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 902, 173 L.Ed.2d 119 (2009). On remand, the probation officer prepared a revised sentencing memorandum stating, inter alia, that Woodyard's sentence on Count 1, the drug conspiracy offense, remained a mandatory life sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) because of his four prior felony drug convictions listed in the § 851 information.

  2. U.S. v. Noblitt

    343 F. App'x 544 (11th Cir. 2009)   Cited 2 times

    Consequently, although a conspirator may reasonably foresee other criminal acts, he is not accountable for those acts if they were not part of the scope of the criminal activity he agreed to undertake.United States v. Westry, 524 F.3d 1198, 1219 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (quotations, citations, and alteration omitted), cert. denied, Carter v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 251, 172 L.Ed.2d 189 (2008), and cert. denied, Hinton v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 902, 173 L.Ed.2d 119 (2009). At the sentencing hearing, the government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence any fact to be considered by the district court.

  3. U.S. v. Saftchick

    335 F. App'x 870 (11th Cir. 2009)   Cited 3 times
    Finding that Otero was satisfied if the possessor was a co-conspirator and the possession was "in furtherance of the conspiracy and reasonably foreseeable . . . , regardless of whether [the co-conspirator] was indicted in this case"

    "Once the government shows that a firearm is present at the site of the charged conduct, the evidentiary burden shifts to the defendant to show that a connection between the firearm and the offense is clearly improbable." United States v. Westry, 524 F.3d 1198, 1221 (11th Cir. 2008) (quotations omitted), cert. denied Carter v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 251, 172 L.Ed.2d 189 (2008), and Hinton v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 902, 173 L.Ed.2d 119 (2009). This court has indicated that the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement may apply to a defendant, based on a co-conspirator's possession of a firearm, only when the possessor is charged as a co-conspirator.