Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-06-04453/USCOURTS-ca4-06-04453-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ricardo U. Alerre
Appellant
Coastal Federal Savings Bank

Paula Foster

Inga Mary Jackson

Benjamin McKnight

Cynthia Moore

Purdue Pharma L.P.

Purdue Pharma, Incorporated

W. Lowndes Sinkler

South Carolina Public Service Authority

The Purdue Frederick Company

United States of America
Appellee
Gregory Walter

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-4451

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DEBORAH BORDEAUX,

Defendant - Appellant,

versus

W. LOWNDES SINKLER; COASTAL FEDERAL SAVINGS

BANK; INGA MARY JACKSON; SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC

SERVICE AUTHORITY; BENJAMIN MCKNIGHT; PAULA

FOSTER; PURDUE PHARMA L.P.; PURDUE PHARMA,

INCORPORATED; THE PURDUE FREDERICK COMPANY;

CYNTHIA MOORE, as Personal Representative of

the Estate of Benjamin D. Moore, MD; GREGORY

WALTER,

Parties in Interest.

No. 06-4452

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

Appeal: 06-4453 Doc: 90 Filed: 01/31/2008 Pg: 1 of 5
2

MICHAEL D. JACKSON,

Defendant - Appellant,

versus

W. LOWNDES SINKLER; COASTAL FEDERAL SAVINGS

BANK; INGA MARY JACKSON; SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC

SERVICE AUTHORITY; BENJAMIN MCKNIGHT; PAULA

FOSTER; PURDUE PHARMA L.P.; PURDUE PHARMA,

INCORPORATED; THE PURDUE FREDERICK COMPANY;

CYNTHIA MOORE, as Personal Representative of

the Estate of Benjamin D. Moore, MD; GREGORY

WALTER,

Parties in Interest.

No. 06-4453

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RICARDO U. ALERRE,

Defendant - Appellant,

versus

W. LOWNDES SINKLER; COASTAL FEDERAL SAVINGS

BANK; INGA MARY JACKSON; SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC

SERVICE AUTHORITY; BENJAMIN MCKNIGHT; PAULA

FOSTER; PURDUE PHARMA L.P.; PURDUE PHARMA,

INCORPORATED; THE PURDUE FREDERICK COMPANY;

CYNTHIA MOORE, as Personal Representative of

the Estate of Benjamin D. Moore, MD; GREGORY

WALTER,

Parties in Interest.

Appeal: 06-4453 Doc: 90 Filed: 01/31/2008 Pg: 2 of 5
3

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. C. Weston Houck, Senior District

Judge. (4:02-cr-00673-CWH-5; 4:02-cr-00673-CWH-2; 4:02-cr-00673-

CWH-6)

Argued: October 30, 2007 Decided: January 31, 2008

Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ARGUED: Thomas Ernest Booth, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Lionel Stukes Lofton, Charleston,

South Carolina, for Appellants. ON BRIEF: Reginald I. Lloyd,

United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, William E. Day,

II, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

ATTORNEY, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. David B. Betts,

Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant Michael D. Jackson; G.

Wells Dickson, Jr., Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant

Deborah Bordeaux.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 06-4453 Doc: 90 Filed: 01/31/2008 Pg: 3 of 5
4

PER CURIAM:

After convictions for controlled substance and money

laundering offenses resulted in substantial prison sentences,

Ricardo Alerre, Deborah Bordeaux, and Michael Jackson appealed

their convictions and sentences. We affirmed the convictions but

vacated the sentences in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.

220 (2005), and remanded for resentencing. United States v.

Alerre, 430 F.3d 681 (4th Cir. 2005). On remand, the district

court awarded each of the defendants a sentence well below the

applicable advisory guideline range.

The Government asserted that the sentences imposed by the

district court were unreasonable because the court significantly

deviated downward from the advisory guideline range and gave

excessive weight to a single sentencing factor. We placed the case

in abeyance, awaiting issuance of Gall v. United States, No. 06-

7949, 552 U.S. (Dec. 10, 2007), and Kimbrough v. United

States, No. 06-6330, 552 U.S. (Dec. 10, 2007). After issuance

of those opinions, the Government filed a motion to dismiss its

appeal, which we granted. Accordingly, we address here only the

cross-appeals.

Alerre, Bordeaux, and Jackson assert that the district court

unconstitutionally calculated the drug quantity attributable to

each of them. They contend that the district court violated Booker

by finding facts at sentencing. But Booker, itself, forecloses

Appeal: 06-4453 Doc: 90 Filed: 01/31/2008 Pg: 4 of 5
5

this argument. Booker explicitly rejected an approach that would

require the jury to find every fact relevant to sentencing. 543

U.S. at 246; see also United States v. Morris, 429 F.3d 65, 72 (4th

Cir. 2005). The physicians also argue that the formula the

district court employed to calculate the drug quantities was

unconstitutionally unreliable. We review only for plain error

because the physicians did not raise this claim before the district

court. See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 731-32 (1993).

Since the physicians cannot establish any error, let alone plain

error, this claim too fails.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 06-4453 Doc: 90 Filed: 01/31/2008 Pg: 5 of 5