United States v. Jeremy Roberts, No. 19-6337 (6th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 20a0602n.06 No. 19-6337 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JEREMY ROBERTS, Defendant-Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FILED Oct 22, 2020 DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE Before: McKEAGUE, THAPAR, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. LARSEN, Circuit Judge. Jeremy Roberts pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(3), the district court increased his Sentencing Guidelines base offense level due to a prior conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver or sell in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417(a)(4). Roberts challenges the district court’s conclusion, arguing that under United States v. Havis, 927 F.3d 382 (6th Cir. 2019) (en banc), his prior conviction does not qualify as a “controlled substance offense” under the Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b). After Roberts filed his appellate brief, a panel of this court addressed this very argument and rejected it. See United States v. Garth, 965 F.3d 493, 495–99 (6th Cir. 2020) (holding that possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver or sell in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417(a)(4) qualifies as a “controlled substance offense” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b)). Persuaded by Garth’s analysis (and bound by it, in any event), Roberts’ prior conviction qualifies as a controlled substance offense, and the district court did not err in calculating his base offense level. We AFFIRM.
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.
