2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 4-13-2005 

# U SA v . D r a yt on P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-3200

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . Dr a yt on" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1366. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1366NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 04- 3200 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. CH AR L E S DE S M OND DR AYT ON, A ppel l ant O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e M id d le D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C r i m . N o. 03- 00357) H onor abl e Y vet t e K ane, D i s t r i ctJ udge Subm i t t ed underT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

A pr i l 8, 2005 B E FO R E : B A R R Y , A M B R O , and G R E E N B E R G , C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: A pr i l 13, 2005) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT G R E E N B E R G , C i r cui tJ udge. T hi s m at t ercomes on be for e thi s cour ton appea l fr om a j udgm entof convi ct i on an d sen tenc e e n tered o n Ju ly2 8 , 2 0 0 4 , fo ll o w ing ap p ell an t C h arles D esm o n d D ray ton ’s p lea o f g u iltyp u rsu a n t to a p lea a g re e m e n t to a n in d ictm e n t ch a rg in g h im w ith in ter sta te2

t r avel i n ai d of di s t r i but i ng and pos s es s i on w i t h i nt entt o di s t r i but e her oi n i n vi ol at i on of 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 5 2 (a )(3 ). T h e d istric t co u rt c a lcu late d D ra yto n ’s g u id e lin e ra n g e a t 6 3 to 78 m ont hs buts ent ence d D r ayt on t o a 60- m ont h cus t odi al t erm , t he maxi m um al l ow ed by
s t atut e, t o be fol l ow ed bya thr ee- y eart erm of s upervi s ed r el eas e and i m pos ed a $500 fi ne. D r ayt on appea l s cont endi ng t hatbeca us e the “di s t r i ctcour ti m pos ed [hi s ] s ent ence b a se d o n th e u n c o n stitu tio n a l F e d e ra l S e n ten c in g G u id e lin e s, th is C o u rt sh o u ld v a c a te [hi s ] s ent ence and r emand forr es ent enci ng. ” A ppel l ant ’ s br . at9. T he di s t r i ctcour thad ju ri s d ic tio n u n d e r 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 2 3 1 a n d w e h a v e ju ri s d ic tio n p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 an d 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 7 4 2 (a). D ra yto n c o n ten d s th a t th is a p p e a l, as is th e situ a tio n in m a n yc a se s b e f o re u s a t th is t i m e, i nvol ves t he tr ans i t i on t o t he pr i nci pl es of U ni t ed St at es v. B ooker , 543 U . S. , 125 S . C t. 7 3 8 (20 0 5 ). N ev erthe less this ap p ea l i s u n u su al be ca u se th e m ax im u m statu tory s e n te n c e w a s le s s th a n th e b o tto m e n d o f th e g u id e lin e ra n g e a p p lic a b le in th is c a s e , a c irc u m sta n c e th a t su g g e sts th a t th e g u id e lin e s w e re n o t g e rm a n e h e re . T h e d istric t co u rt, h o w e v e r, in d ica ted th a t “[ b ]e c a u se I b e liev e th a t I a m b o u n d b yth e g u id e lin e s, I w ill i m pos e a gui del i ne s ent ence . ” A pp. at61. T hus , t he gui del i nes m ayhave i m pact ed on t he s ent ence t he courti m pos ed. I n t hes e ci r cumst ance s w e have concl uded thatt he i s s ue w i t h r es pectt o D r ayt on’ s s ent ence r ai s ed on thi s appea l bes tw oul d be det erm i ned byt he d is tr ic t c o u rt in th e f

ir s t in s ta n c e . I n acc or dance w i t h t he af or es ai d, w e w i l l vaca t e the s ent ence i n t he j udgm entof3

convi ct i on and s ent ence ent er ed J ul y28, 2004, and w i l l r emand t he ca s e t o t he di s t r i ct cour tforr es ent enci ng. W e, how ever , w i l l notdi s turb t he convi ct i on.