Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03272/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03272-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Corey Henderson
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of

Nebraska. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3272

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District

* of Nebraska.

Corey Henderson, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: July 5, 2005

Filed: July 27, 2005

___________

Before GRUENDER, MAGILL, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

On June 3, 2004, Henderson pled guilty to conspiring to distribute or possess

with the intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine base between 500 grams and 1.5

kilograms. The district court1

 sentenced Henderson to 188 months' imprisonment, the

bottom of the guidelines range. On appeal, Henderson argues only that pursuant to

Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), the guidelines are unconstitutional

and his sentence should be vacated. In light of United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct.

Appellate Case: 04-3272 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/27/2005 Entry ID: 1933258
-2-

738 (2005) and United States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d 543 (8th Cir. 2005) (en banc), we

affirm Henderson's sentence. 

Because Henderson raises this argument for the first time on appeal, we review

for plain error. Pirani, 406 F.3d at 549-50. The error at issue is the district court's

mandatory application of the now advisory guidelines. It is Henderson's burden to

establish that this error affected his substantial rights. That is, that there is a

reasonable probability that the district court would have imposed a more favorable

sentence under the advisory guidelines regime mandated by Booker. Id. at 553.

Henderson is unable to meet this burden. Although the district court sentenced

Henderson at the bottom of the applicable sentencing guidelines range, that alone is

not enough to make the required showing. Id. And there is nothing in the record to

indicate any reasonable probability that the district court would have imposed a lesser

sentence had it applied the guidelines in an advisory fashion. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-3272 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/27/2005 Entry ID: 1933258