Case ID: f-appx_699/html/0594-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mantrel Deshun YOUNG, originally named as Montrell Deshun Young Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-3669
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 5, 2017
    Filed: November 3, 2017
    
      Anne E. Gardner, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Jeffrey M. Rosenzweig, Little Rock, AR, for Defendant-Appellant
    Mantrel Deshun Young, Pro Se
    Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Mantrel Young challenges the 120 month sentence the district court imposed following his conviction for conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B),. 846. In particular, Young argues his 2004 conviction for using a communication device to facilitate a drug transaction under 21 U.S.C. § 843(b) does not qualify as a “controlled substance offense” for purposes of the career offender enhancement, see U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b).

Not all § 843(b) offenses qualify as “controlled substance offenses,” see United States v. Henao-Melo, 591 F.3d 798, 805 (5th Cir. 2009). A § 843(b) offense is a “controlled substance offense” “if the offense of conviction established that the underlying offense (the offense committed, caused, or facilitated) was a controlled substance offense,” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 cmt. n.l (2016) (quotation omitted). We conclude that it was not plain error when the district court determined that Young’s 2004 conviction did so qualify, particularly because Young’s attorney only generally objected to that determination and conceded that his offense did qualify under current case law. See U.S. v. Grimes, 702 F.3d 460, 469-70 (8th Cir. 2012) (applying plain error review); Henao-Melo, 591 F.3d at 800-01 (reviewing for plain error because defendant did not specifically argue at sentencing that government failed to produce sufficient evidence that prior § 843(b) conviction constituted drug trafficking offense).

Accordingly, we affirm. 
      
      . The Honorable J, Leon Holmes, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.