Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Cook

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

September 1, 2017

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Vivien Troy Cook, Defendant-Appellant.

          Argued: August 3, 2017

         Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee of Chattanooga. No. 1:04-cr-00036-5-Curtis L. Collier, District Judge.

         ARGUED:

          Jonathan A. Moffatt, FEDERAL DEFENDER SERVICES OF EASTERN TENNESSEE, INC., Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellant.

          Luke A. McLaurin, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

         ON BRIEF:

          Jonathan A. Moffatt, FEDERAL DEFENDER SERVICES OF EASTERN TENNESSEE, INC., Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellant.

          Steven S. Neff, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

          Before: SILER, CLAY, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.

          OPINION

          CLAY, CIRCUIT JUDGE.

         Defendant Vivien Cook appeals from the order entered by the district court on September 13, 2016, denying Defendant's motion to reduce sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The district court denied the motion because Defendant's original sentence was based on his status as a career offender pursuant to the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual ("U.S.S.G.") § 4B1.1. According to the district court, Defendant was ineligible for a sentence reduction.

         For the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM the district court's order denying Defendant's motion to reduce sentence.

         BACKGROUND

         A. Factual History

         In September 2004, Defendant was indicted for a number of drug related counts. In 2005, Defendant pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute at least five kilograms of cocaine hydrochloride, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). The United States Probation Office prepared the presentence report and determined that Defendant was to be held accountable for conspiring to distribute at least twelve kilograms of cocaine hydrochloride, which set a base offense level of 32 under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(4). Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a), Defendant was classified as a career offender with an enhanced offense level of 37 based on his prior felony convictions for controlled substances. Defendant's offense level was then reduced three levels for his acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a) and (b), which brought Defendant's total offense level down to 34.

         Defendant's criminal history category was enhanced to VI from a criminal history category of IV because he was considered a career offender, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b). Based on a total offense level of 34 and a criminal history category of VI, the guideline range for imprisonment according to the 2004 Sentencing Guidelines was 262 to 327 months. See § 4B1.1 (career offender). However, § 841(b)(1)(A) required imposition of a minimum term of life due to Defendant's prior felony controlled substance convictions and that became the applicable guideline under U.S.S.G. § 5G1.1(b). The government moved for a downward departure under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) based on Defendant's substantial assistance.

         On December 12, 2005, the district court granted the government's downward departure motion and imposed a sentence of 211 months upon Defendant. The district court advised Defendant that pursuant to § 841(b)(1)(A), it was statutorily mandated to impose at a minimum a life sentence based on his prior convictions. The district court concluded that "but for the government's [substantial assistance] motion here [Defendant] would have been sentenced to life." (R. 356, Transcript of Sentencing Hearing, Page ID # 882.) The district court also noted that "absent the minimum life sentence, " the Sentencing Guidelines range would have been 262 to 327 months' imprisonment based on an offense level of 34 and a criminal history category of VI. (Id.) The ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.