U.S. v. Friend

17 Citing cases

  1. Little v. U.S.

    242 F. Supp. 2d 478 (E.D. Mich. 2003)   Cited 5 times
    Noting that a Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals' unpublished decision is not binding upon a federal district court in Michigan, but rather is treated as learned authority

    Amendment 599 explains that, in order to avoid double-counting, an enhancement that might seem to be appropriate under § 2K2.1(b) could be inappropriate for a sentence under § 2K2.4. The rationale is that the conduct that triggered the § 2K2.1(b) enhancement is related to the conduct that forms the basis for the 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) conviction. United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002). For sentencing purposes, that conduct should not be counted twice.

  2. U.S. v. Logan

    97-CR-99(03) (JMR/RLE) (D. Minn. Jun. 30, 2008)   Cited 1 times
    Explaining the process that Judge Rosenbaum used to calculate Logan's guidelines range

    Essentially, Amendment 599 specifies that when a defendant receives a separate penalty for use of a firearm, that same firearm should not factor into the total offense calculation level for the underlying offense. See United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002). Thus, the Amendment prevents double counting the firearm by barring application of the weapons enhancement normally applied to a crime of violence or drug trafficking offense.

  3. U.S. v. Moore

    Crim. No. 96-81(1) (PAM) (D. Minn. Aug. 21, 2007)

    Amendment 599, as adopted after Defendant's 1997 conviction, guards against counting conduct twice for sentencing purposes when a defendant is convicted for using or possessing a firearm during a violent or drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 921 (8th Cir. 2002). Amendment 599 applies only to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) convictions.

  4. United States v. Wymes

    558 F. App'x 718 (8th Cir. 2014)   Cited 2 times

    For sentencing purposes, that conduct should not be counted twice." United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam). Accordingly, the application note instructs the sentencing court as follows:

  5. United States v. Bly

    518 F. App'x 599 (10th Cir. 2013)

    Because § 2K2.4 doesn't apply to his convictions, neither can Amendment 599, and Mr. Bly is ineligible for relief. See United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002) (holding "Amendment 599 applies only to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) . . . convictions, and not to § 922(g) convictions"); United States v. Abreu, 33 F. App'x 399, 401 (10th Cir. 2002) (unpublished) (holding Amendment 599 inapplicable because defendant's three convictions did not implicate 18 U.S.C. §§ 844(h), 924(c), or 929(a)). We grant Mr. Bly's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the judgment of the district court.

  6. U.S. v. Alexander

    310 F. App'x 951 (8th Cir. 2009)

    Upon reviewing the record and counsel's brief, we conclude the district court did not err in denying Alexander's motion. See United States v. Peveler, 359 F.3d 369, 373 (6th Cir. 2004) (stating a decision to deny a motion to modify under § 3582 is reviewed for abuse of discretion, but to the extent a defendant's arguments rest on a legal interpretation of various Sentencing Guidelines, the interpretation of those Guidelines is a question of law reviewed de novo); United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam) (proclaiming Guidelines Amendment 599 only applies to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) convictions). The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Sr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, now retired.

  7. United States v. Wiley

    6:19-cr-60022-SOH (W.D. Ark. Sep. 5, 2024)

    See Id., p. 67 (Amendment); see also U.S.S.G. § 2K2.4 n.4. Amendment 599 was intended “to clarify under what circumstances defendants sentenced for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) in conjunction with convictions for other offenses may receive weapons enhancements contained in the guidelines for those other offenses.” Id. p. 68 (Reason for Amendment); see United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002). As the district court in the Northern District of Alabama recognized:

  8. United States v. Greenlaw

    03-cr-107 (JNE) (4) (D. Minn. Feb. 28, 2022)

    See United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1 (U.S.S.G.). Defendant argues that the enhancement impermissibly double-counts his possession of a weapon because he also was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Where a court imposes a sentence for a violation of Section 924(c) (or other specified provisions), it should “not apply any weapon enhancement in the guideline for the underlying offense . . . .” U.S.S.G. § 2K2.4; United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002).

  9. United States v. Brown

    Case No. 12-CR-0172(3) (SRN/AJB) (D. Minn. May. 9, 2018)

    Amendment 599 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (the "Guidelines"), effective November 1, 2000, clarifies the circumstances under which a weapons enhancement may be applied to an underlying offense when the defendant is also convicted of firearm use or possession under § 924(c). See United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002). The Amendment revised the commentary to the application notes concerning § 2K2, stating, in part,

  10. Pitts v. United States

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-7593 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 17, 2015)

    The language of the Amendment "makes clear that [it] applies only to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) convictions." United States v. Friend, 303 F.3d 921, 922 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam).While Amendment 599 has retroactive effect, it became effective on November 1, 2000, before Petitioner's sentencing in 2011.