Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
No. 12-4981
No. 12-4982
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Huntington.
Robert C. Chambers,
Chief District Judge. (3:11-cr-00062-1; 3:11-cr-00192-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Lamont Lee Miller, Jr., was sentenced to 132-months
imprisonment after pleading guilty to two counts of receiving a
firearm while under felony indictment, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
922(n), 924(a)(1)(D) (2006), and five counts of distribution
of
quantity
841(a)(1)
of
cocaine
(2006).
base,
Miller
in
violation
initially
pled
of
21
guilty
U.S.C.
to
the
However,
firearms
enhancements.
charges,
and
in
applying
several
offense-level
We affirm.
I.
Miller
first
contends
the
district
court
erred
in
of
contract
interpretation
principles
de
novo.
United States v. Snow, 234 F.3d 187, 189 (4th Cir. 2000).
Under
Id.
In the context of
has
relied
to
his
substantial
detriment
by,
for
district
court
properly
found
that
Miller
Moreover,
despite
dismiss the
freeing
drug
the
charges.
Government
West,
from
F.3d
its
at
obligation
69-70.
As
to
the
rewarded
Miller
sentencing process.
for
his
breach
and
disrupted
the
v.
Bowe,
309
F.3d
234,
4
239
(4th
Cir.
2002)
(Double
We therefore conclude
the
transcripts
of
the
guilty
plea
hearings
Our review
leads
us
to
Miller
pleading
understood
guilty
and
the
the
rights
sentence
he
he
was
faced.
relinquishing
Moreover,
by
the
courts order voiding the plea agreement did not force Miller to
plead guilty to both the firearms and drug charges.
That Miller
was not free to withdraw his guilty plea to the firearms charges
does not mean that he entered the plea involuntarily.
the
Governments
ability
to
pursue
the
drug
charges
Likewise,
did
not
III.
Miller also contends that the district court erred in
applying several offense-level enhancements at sentencing.
determining
whether
the
district
court
properly
In
applied
the
contends
that
the
district
court
erred
in
Miller
fact.
presented
This
ample
investigating
firearmthat
serial
of
is
meritless.
evidenceincluding
agents
Miller
number,
knowledge
contention
and
the
testimony,
possessed
the
obliterated
Millers
and
firearm
Guidelines
The
stipulation,
photograph
with
an
specifically
serial
Government
number
is
an
of
the
obliterated
indicate
not
that
required.
is
strict
liability
enhancement).
6
Accordingly,
we
conclude
that
the
district
court
properly
applied
the
enhancement.
B.
Miller
next
argues
that
the
Government
presented
use
includes
USSG 3B1.4.
directing,
Used or attempted
commanding,
encouraging,
Millers
factual
stipulation
and
an
investigating
United
States
2001).
v.
Murphy,
Accordingly,
we
254
F.3d
conclude
511,
that
the
513-14
(4th
district
Cir.
court
properly
argues
that
the
district
court
erred
in
on
firearms.
its
finding
that
he
engaged
in
the
trafficking
of
This contention
cities
buyers, and
for
the
profit,
the
clandestine
inflated
nature
of
prices
the
paid
by
the
transactions.
In
would
conclude
that
be
disposed
the
of
unlawfully.
district
court
Accordingly,
properly
applied
we
the
enhancement.
D.
Miller
next
contends
that
the
Government
presented
organizer
or
district
court
pursuant
to
defendant
manager
erred
USSG
must
have
of
the
offense
in
imposing
3B1.1.
To
exercised
merit
and
therefore
two-level
the
managerial
the
enhancement
enhancement,
responsibility
the
over
to
plan
the
transactions,
negotiate
prices,
and
165-66
2003)
(4th
participant
exercised.)
Cir.
is
(Leadership
sufficient
as
long
over
as
there
only
is
one
some
other
control
Government
claims
that
Miller
USSG 3C1.1.
obstructed
justice
by
and
in
testimony
before
grand
jury.
Miller
fail.
As
stipulation
conduct.
part
of
of
facts
his
plea
agreement,
describing
his
Miller
offense
agreed
and
to
relevant
Fifth.
Miller
thereby
attempted
to
obstruct
justice
with
dispense
contentions
with
are
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
facts
and
the
materials
legal
before
this court and argument would not aid in the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
10