Sentencing Guidelines – Enhancement

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Jason L. White v. United States of America

Case No.: 17-2749

Officials: EASTERBROOK, WOOD, and BRENNAN, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sentencing Guidelines – Enhancement

Jason White, convicted of possessing a firearm as a felon, petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his 30-year sentence. His sentence included an armed career criminal enhancement, which requires at least three previous convictions “for a violent felony or a serious drug offense.” 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). After a change in the law, the parties agreed the sentencing court had relied on one of White’s previous convictions that no longer supported the enhancement. For that inapplicable conviction, the district court substituted in another—an Illinois state conviction for cocaine delivery—and concluded White still qualified as an armed career criminal. So the court denied his § 2255 petition.

Given two of our court’s recent decisions—Dotson v. United States, 949 F.3d 317 (7th Cir. 2020), and United States v. Ruth, 966 F.3d 642 (7th Cir. 2020)—reasonable jurists may debate whether a court may substitute one predicate conviction for another for a sentencing enhancement, as well as whether an Illinois cocaine conviction may serve as a predicate offense. We therefore granted White a certificate of appealability.

White’s petition falls short, however. Not only did he have fair notice that the substitute conviction could be used as a predicate offense, but waiver and procedural default also foreclose his challenge on both questions. We therefore affirm the denial of his petition.

Affirmed

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is Corporate Counsel, at Salesforce.