Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06497/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06497-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sherrell Gary Brinkley
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6497

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

SHERRELL GARY BRINKLEY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, 

Senior District Judge. (3:91-cr-00131-GCM-1)

Submitted: October 14, 2016 Decided: October 25, 2016

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sherrell Gary Brinkley, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; 

Jennifer Marie Hoefling, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, 

Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6497 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/25/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Sherrell Gary Brinkley appeals the district court’s order 

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion, in which 

Brinkley sought a reduction of his 360-month sentence based on 

Amendment 591 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm.

Amendment 591 was promulgated “to emphasize that the 

sentencing court must apply the offense Guideline referenced in 

the Statutory Index for the offense of conviction.” United 

States v. Grecco, 342 F. App’x 739, 745 (3d Cir. 2009) (No. 

08-4102) (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted). 

Contrary to Brinkley’s position, the Amendment does not 

foreclose a sentencing court, once it determines the appropriate

offense Guideline based on the Statutory Index, from applying 

any cross-reference sanctioned by that Guideline. Id. at 

745-46; see also United States v. Hurley, 374 F.3d 38, 40 (1st 

Cir. 2004); Galloway v. United States, 62 F. App’x 261, 262 

(10th Cir. 2003) (No. 01-4191). In Brinkley’s case, the 

Guideline applicable to his 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2012) 

conviction, U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1 (1989), 

expressly stated that a cross-reference might apply. See USSG 

§ 2K2.1(c). The district court did not err in applying the 

cross-reference for murder. 

Because Amendment 591 did not, as Brinkley contends, 

preclude the use of cross-references, we affirm the denial of 

Appeal: 16-6497 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/25/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

the § 3582(c)(2) motion. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 16-6497 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/25/2016 Pg: 3 of 3