IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. Case No: 4:02cr52-RH 

ERIC EUGENCE BALCOM 

_____________________________/ 

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION FOR FIRST STEP ACT SENTENCE REDUCTION 

The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, by and through the undersigned 

Assistant United States Attorney, responds to Defendant’s Motion for Sentence 

Reduction Pursuant to Section 404 of the First Step Act (ECF No. 176) and to the 

Court’s Order Setting Procedures for a Possible Sentence Reduction (ECF No. 169). 

For reasons outlined below, the government does not oppose Defendant’s request for 

relief. 

BACKGROUND 

In two sales conducted two weeks apart in August 2002, Defendant sold a 

confidential informant a total of 93.2 grams of cocaine base. PSR ¶¶ 9, 10. On February 

3, 2003, Balcom pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of 

cocaine base (Count One). PSR ¶ 7. 

Defendant scored seven criminal history points, which would have placed him 

in Criminal History Category IV, but for his status as a Career Offender, which resulted 

Case 4:02-cr-00052-RH-CAS Document 178 Filed 02/27/19 Page 1 of 6
2 

in a Criminal History Category of VI. Balcom’s criminal history included a 1992 

conviction for battery arising from an incident in which he slapped his girlfriend 

multiple times, and a 1996 aggravated assault conviction arising from a shooting in 

which Balcom fired several rounds at a man in another car. PSR ¶ 34. 

Balcom was subject to an enhanced statutory minimum of life imprisonment 

based upon his prior convictions for possession of cocaine in 1996, and possession of 

cocaine with intent to sell in 1998. PSR ¶¶ 35, 36. The 1996 conviction arose from 

investigators’ discovery of a cocaine base manufacturing operation involving three 

microwave ovens and other paraphernalia at Balcom’s home when they arrested him 

on a warrant for Attempted First Degree Murder arising from the shooting he had 

committed a week earlier. PSR ¶ 35. The 1998 conviction arose from Balcom’s 

possession of five grams of cocaine base packaged for sale while he was on probation 

for the 1996 conviction. PSR ¶ 36. 

During the presentence interview, Balcom said he had been selling cocaine base 

for “about a month” before he was “caught.” PSR ¶ 14. He indicated that he would 

buy $200 to $300 worth of crack and sell it for a profit. PSR ¶14. The sales of cocaine 

for which Balcom was indicted (Counts Two and Three) occurred in August 2002; he 

was arrested more than three months later, on December 4, 2002. The two sales did 

not involve $200 to $300 worth of cocaine base. The first sale was for $2,100 worth of 

cocaine base, the second was for $1,200. At sentencing, Defendant was held 

accountable for only the 93.2 grams of cocaine base he actually sold to the confidential 

Case 4:02-cr-00052-RH-CAS Document 178 Filed 02/27/19 Page 2 of 6
3 

informant in August 2002. The government did not object to this determination or 

seek to offer evidence of additional drug quantities. Such evidence would not have 

altered the sentence in the case. 

Defendant’s unenhanced sentencing range was 262 to 327 months’ 

imprisonment, based upon a Criminal History Category of VI, and Offense Level of 

34. PSR ¶ 74. As enhanced by his prior convictions, Balcom faced a statutory minimum 

sentence of life imprisonment, which the court imposed on August 18, 2003. PSR ¶ 

73; ECF No. 54. 

Defendant now seeks a reduction in sentence to 228 months’ imprisonment 

under the First Step Act of 2018 (2018 FSA). The government does not oppose such 

a reduction. 

POSITION ON SENTENCE REDUCTION 

Balcom is eligible for a reduction in sentence under the 2018 FSA, which permits 

the district court, in its discretion, to impose a reduced sentence as if the Fair Sentencing 

Act of 2010 (2010 FSA) were in effect at the time the defendant’s offense was 

committed. See 2018 FSA, Section 404. Had Balcom been sentenced under the 2010 

FSA, the enhanced sentence of life imprisonment would no longer apply, and his 

unenhanced guideline range would remain 262 to 327 months. He would also be 

subject to an enhanced statutory minimum sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment. 

Defendant correctly notes that in its initial analysis of the case, the government 

concluded that any reduction in sentence should be within the guideline range of 262 

Case 4:02-cr-00052-RH-CAS Document 178 Filed 02/27/19 Page 3 of 6
4 

to 327 months. The nature of the offense and the history and characteristics of the 

defendant weighed heavily against Defendant in this analysis. It is an over-simplication 

to suggest that Defendant’s sale of 93.2 grams of crack was what landed him a life 

sentence. Although Defendant was only scored for the cocaine base that he sold on 

two occasions, the conspiracy, by his own admission, would have involved more than 

93.2 grams, as Defendant himself acknowledged he had been selling crack for about a 

month before he was arrested. PSR ¶ 14. Defendant claimed that he would buy $200 

to $300 worth of crack at a time and sell it for a profit. PSR ¶ 14. The conduct 

underlying the substantive distribution counts in this case strongly indicates that 

Defendant was accountable for considerably more crack than the 93 grams for which 

he was scored. On August 7, and August 23, 2002, roughly three months before his 

arrest, Defendant sold not $200 to $300, but $2,100 and $1,200 worth of cocaine to a 

confidential informant. His prior drug convictions further suggest that Defendant was 

in and out of the drug business for years, rather than months. See PSR ¶¶ 35, 36. 

But it is Defendant’s violent criminal history that provides the most compelling 

reason for a sentence within the guideline range. His convictions for what was 

essentially a drive-by shooting, and for battery on his girlfriend, combined with his four 

separate arrests for battery/assault, three of them aggravated, must give pause to anyone 

considering release of Defendant back into the community. Indeed, that appears to 

have been the conclusion of the last President of the United States, who, in September 

2016, denied Defendant’s commutation petition without taking so much as a day off 

Case 4:02-cr-00052-RH-CAS Document 178 Filed 02/27/19 Page 4 of 6
5 

his life sentence. See www.justice.gov/pardon/obama-denials/commutations-deniedpresident-barack-obama. 

On the other hand, Defendant’s post-sentencing conduct militates in favor of 

the relief he seeks. His age, participation in drug treatment, anger management, and 

vocational programs, his role as a Suicide Companion, and his graduation from the faith 

based Life Connection Program, along with the relative remoteness of his prior criminal 

conduct, are factors that would likely convince a court to vary below the guideline range 

were Defendant sentenced today. Accordingly, but with some reluctance, the 

government does not oppose Defendant’s request for a reduction of sentence to 228 

months’ imprisonment. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 LAWRENCE KEEFE 

United States Attorney 

 

 s/Karen Rhew-Miller 

Karen Rhew-Miller 

Chief, Appellate Division 

Assistant United States Attorney 

D.C. Bar No.: 405181 

111 North Adams Street, 4th Floor 

Tallahassee, Florida 32301 

(850) 942-8430 

karen.rhew-miller@usdoj.gov 

 

Case 4:02-cr-00052-RH-CAS Document 178 Filed 02/27/19 Page 5 of 6
6 

LOCAL RULE 7.1(F) CERTIFICATE

I certify that the above response complies with the length limit set forth in 

N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 7.1(F). This response contains 1,166 words. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing response was served via ECF 

notification on counsel of record, this 27th day of February 2019. 

 s/Karen Rhew-Miller 

 Karen Rhew-Miller 

Case 4:02-cr-00052-RH-CAS Document 178 Filed 02/27/19 Page 6 of 6