Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sentencing Guidelines- Storing and Distributing Drugs

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 1, 2024//

Sentencing Guidelines- Storing and Distributing Drugs

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 1, 2024//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Travis Montgomery

Case No.: 23-1976

Officials: Sykes, Chief Judge, and Lee and Kolar, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sentencing Guidelines- Storing and Distributing Drugs

Montgomery, pleaded guilty to distributing methamphetamine. The government presented evidence that Montgomery stored drugs, cash, and drug trafficking paraphernalia in a storage unit leased by his sister. The district court applied a two-level enhancement under § 2D1.1(b)(12) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which mandates an increase when a defendant “maintained a premises for the purpose of … distributing a controlled substance.” Montgomery objected to this enhancement, arguing that his use of the storage unit did not meet the criteria for the enhancement.

The district court, however, determined that the storage unit qualified as a “premises” under § 2D1.1(b)(12) and that Montgomery had primarily used it for storing and distributing drugs. This enhancement increased Montgomery’s total offense level, resulting in a sentence of 235 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release.

On appeal, Montgomery challenged the application of the § 2D1.1(b)(12) enhancement. The appellate court agreed with the district court that the storage unit constituted a “premises” under the enhancement. However, the court was uncertain whether Montgomery sufficiently “maintained” the storage unit for the purposes of § 2D1.1(b)(12), given that he did not lease the unit himself and used it only briefly. The court also found that the record did not clearly indicate that Montgomery was using the storage unit primarily for distributing drugs during the month in question. Consequently, the court vacated the judgment and remanded the case for further fact-finding.

Vacated and remanded.

Decided 06/24/24

Full Text

Polls

Does your firm utilize AI?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

Case Digests

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests