United States v. Michael Sheffey

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 20a0384n.06 No. 18-3775 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) FILED Jun 29, 2020 ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ON APPEAL FROM THE ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT Plaintiff-Appellee, ) COURT FOR THE ) NORTHERN DISTRICT OF v. ) OHIO ) MICHAEL SHEFFEY, ) ) Defendant-Appellant. ) BEFORE: SILER, GIBBONS, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. After being charged with multiple federal drug offenses, Michael Sheffey entered into a written plea agreement in which he pled guilty to possessing a controlled substance with the intent to distribute. Based on the plea agreement, the parties believed Sheffey’s base offense level was fourteen. Accordingly, the parties anticipated a Guidelines range of thirty to thirty-seven months’ imprisonment. The Probation Office, however, recommended that Sheffey be designated as a career offender based on prior convictions for heroin trafficking and aggravated robbery. With the career offender designation, the Probation Office recommended a Guidelines range of 151 to 188 months in prison. Sheffey now argues that the career offender enhancement was inappropriate because the state statute under which he was convicted of heroin trafficking, Ohio Rev. Code § 2925.03(A)(2), No. 18-3775, United States v. Sheffey is categorically overbroad. We conclude that the district court did not err in applying the career- offender enhancement and affirm the judgment. I. After an individual overdosed on heroin and identified Michael Sheffey as his supplier, a confidential informant purchased controlled substances from Sheffey at his home in Ashtabula, Ohio. A grand jury then charged Sheffey with violations of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C) for distributing methamphetamine (Count One), distributing heroin (Count Two), and for possessing those drugs and cocaine with the intent to distribute (Count Three), as well as being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (Count Four). Sheffey subsequently pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute (Count Three) in a written plea agreement. In that plea, Sheffey and the government agreed that his base offense level would be fourteen for his offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(13), because the offense involved 3.81 grams of cocaine base, 2.23 grams of fentanyl, and 2.62 grams of cocaine hydrochloride. The government agreed to dismiss Counts One, Two, and Four. Though Sheffey waived many of the bases of appeal and post-conviction attack, he explicitly reserved the right to appeal “any sentence to the extent it exceeds the maximum of the sentencing imprisonment range determined under the advisory Sentencing Guidelines in accordance with the sentencing stipulations and computations in this agreement[.]” DE 17, Plea Agreement, PageID 59. At the change of plea hearing, the court determined that, based on Sheffey’s stipulated offense level of fourteen, the estimated Guidelines range would be thirty to thirty-seven months’ imprisonment. The written plea agreement, however, stipulated that “Defendant understands that the advisory guidelines range will be determined by the Court at the ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals