United States v. Lawrence, No. 16-2056 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his 300 month sentence after a jury found him guilty of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, and attempt to obstruct justice. The court concluded that the district court did not rely on objected-to facts in the presentencing report to calculate the drug quantity; the relevant responsive evidence had already been produced at trial, which the Government relied on to meet its burden regarding drug quantity at sentencing; the district court did not clearly err in determining acts outside the scope of the conspiracy was relevant conduct; there was no error in relying on a witness's testimony because the testimony bore indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy; and, because of possible embellishment, the district court attributed only one pound of ice meth to defendant, discounting the others. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Melloy, Author, with Wollman and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not rely on objected-to facts in the presentence report to calculate drug quantity, and the relevant responsive evidence in the case regarding drug amounts had been produced at trial and supported the drug quantity determination; the court properly considered defendant's drug-related activity outside the scope of the conspiracy as relevant conduct; no error in relying on a particular witness's testimony as part of the drug quantity calculation as his testimony had indicia of reliability and the district court made its own independent evaluation of the reliability of the evidence.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.