Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine-Sentencing Guidelines-Prior Conduct

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 8, 2024//

Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine-Sentencing Guidelines-Prior Conduct

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 8, 2024//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Bernell Brasher

Case No.: 23-1180

Officials: Easterbrook, St. Eve, and Jackson-Akiwumi, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine-Sentencing Guidelines-Prior Conduct

Bernell Brasher was convicted of conspiring to distribute methamphetamine. The investigation began when a confidential source alerted the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) that Bacaree Oaks had a pound of methamphetamine available for sale. The source proposed selling the methamphetamine on credit and paying Oaks and Brasher $5,000 afterward. Instead, the source turned the methamphetamine over to law enforcement, confirming its 99% purity through testing. Subsequently, Brasher and Oaks were arrested. During Brasher’s arrest, he admitted owing money to his supplier in Mexico for approximately 100 pounds of methamphetamine he had distributed.

Brasher was indicted for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and entered a guilty plea. The presentence investigation report (PSR) determined that Brasher’s relevant conduct encompassed four instances of previous drug distribution. Brasher contested the PSR’s findings, though these objections are not under consideration in this appeal. The district court sentenced Brasher to 200 months in prison, falling within the sentencing guidelines range.

On appeal, Brasher argued that his prior conduct was too dissimilar from the current offense and occurred too far in the past to be factored into his sentencing guidelines calculation. The appellate court disagreed, finding sufficient similarity between the offense Brasher was convicted of and his uncharged past activities to meet the plain error standard. Additionally, the court dismissed Brasher’s contention that the district court had failed to adequately justify why the past conduct was pertinent. Consequently, the court upheld the district court’s decision.

Affirmed.

Decided 06/28/24

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