US v. Wable: Wable was on supervised release when his probation officer discovered an assault rifle in the trailer where he was living. Faced with revocation, Wable coerced another man into coming to court and claiming the gun, but the scheme fell apart during his testimony and Wable was returned to prison. When his revocation sentence was just about over, the Government indicted him for being a felon in possession of a firearm and witness tampering. After being convicted at trial, Wable was sentenced to 180 months in prison.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed Wable’s sentence, based on two issues that were raised pro se by Wable at sentencing (while he was represented by counsel). The first was whether a 2006 West Virginia conviction designated “cultivating marijuana” in the PSR was a “controlled substance offense” that enhanced his based offense level on the firearm offense. Wable argued there was no such offense and that, based on admittedly contradictory state records provided on appeal, was a generic attempt offense rather than a drug offense. Applying plain error review (the pro se objection was on a different basis), the court concluded that “had Wable objected to the classification of his conviction at sentencing, then the state records’ lack of clarity would weigh in his favor,” but was insufficient to show an error, much less a plain one. Second, Wable had argued that the district court failed to adequately consider a pro se argument he made for a lesser sentence based on a “chemical assault” by guards at the regional jail one night during his trial. The court found no “abuse of discretion,” pointing out that the “district court noted repeatedly that it had taken into account all of Wable’s submissions.”
NOTE: I represented Wable in this appeal.
No comments:
Post a Comment