FI L ED

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S

EL EVENTH CI RCUI T

MARCH 30, 2010

J OHN L EY

CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

N o

. 0 9

- 1 3 2 6 5

N o n

- A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 7

- 0 0 0 0 4

- C R

- 5

- R S

- 1

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A

,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e

,

v e r s u s

M A R T I N B

. M O O R E

,

D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A p p e a l s f

r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t

f o r t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f F l o r i d a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

( M a r c h 3 0

, 2 0 1 0 )

B e f o r e B L A C K

, H U L L a n d P R Y O R

, C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.

P E R C U R I A M :

T h i s i s M a r t i n B

. M o o r e ’ s s e c o n d d i r e c t a p p e a l o f h i s s e n t e n c e

. I n t h i sa p p e a l

, M o o r e c h a l l e n g e s h i s l i f e s e n t e n c e i m p o s e d o n r e m a n d f o r h i s c o n v i c t i o n

f o r p o s s e s s i o n w i t h i n t e n t t o d i s t r i b u t e c o c a i n e a n d f i v e g r a m s o r m o r e b u t l e s s

t h a n f i f t y g r a m s o f c o c a i n e b a s e

, i n v i o l a t i o n o f 2 1 U

. S

. C

. § 8 4 1 ( a )

, ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) ( i i i )

,

a n d ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) ( C o u n t T w o )

. A f t e r r e v i e w

, w e a f

f i r m t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s c a l c u l a t i o n

o f M o o r e ’ s a d v i s o r y g u i d e l i n e s r a n g e o n C o u n t T w o a s b e i n g l i f e i m p r i s o n m e n t

.

H o w e v e r

, w e m u s t a g a i n v a c a t e M o o r e ’ s l i f e s e n t e n c e o n C o u n t T w o b e c a u s e t h e

d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d i n t r e a t i n g l i f e i m p r i s o n m e n t a s a m a n d a t o r y s e n t e n c e a n d

r e m a n d f o r r e s e n t e n c i n g c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h i s o p i n i o n

.

A j u r y c o n v i c t e d M o o r e o f c o n s p i r a c y t o d i s t r i b u t e a n d p o s s e s s w i t h i n t e n t

t o d i s t r i b u t e c o c a i n e a n d c o c a i n e b a s e ( C o u n t O n e ) a n d p o s s e s s i o n w i t h i n t e n t t o

d i s t r i b u t e c o c a i n e a n d c o c a i n e b a s e ( C o u n t T w o )

. T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i m p o s e d t w o

c o n c u r r e n t l i f

e s e n t e n c e s

. O n d i r e c t a p p e a l

, t h i s C o u r t a f f i r m e d M o o r e ’ s

c o n v i c t i o n s a n d h i s l i f

e s e n t e n c e w i t h r e s p e c t t o C o u n t O n e

, b u t r e m a n d e d f o r

r e s e n t e n c i n g o n C o u n t T w o b e c a u s e t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t “ e r r o n e o u s l y b e l i e v e d t h a t

M o o r e ’ s c o n v i c t i o n o n C o u n t I I c a r r i e d a m a n d a t o r y l i f e s e n t e n c e

. ” U n i t e d S t a t e s

v

. M o o r e

, 3 0 3 F

. A p p ’ x 7 6 7

, 7 6 9 ( 1 1 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 8 ) ( “ M o o r e I ” )

. O n r e m a n d

, t h e 1

d i s t r i c t c o u r t e n t e r e d a n o r d e r r e i m p o s i n g a c o n c u r r e n t l i f e s e n t e n c e o n C o u n t T w o

,

The Court also re manded so the district c ourt could fix a cleric al er ror in the judg ment 1

and commitment order , but expl icitly left “undisturbe d” the life sentenc e on Count One.

Moore I , 303 F. App’ x at 769.

2s t a t i n g t h a t t h i s s e n t e n c e w a s “ m a n d a t o r y

. ”

I

. C a l c u l a t i o n o f G u i d e l i n e s R a n g e

W e f i r s t e x p l a i n w h y M o o r e ’ s a d v i s o r y g u i d e l i n e s r a n g e i s l i f e

i m p r i s o n m e n t

.

M o o r e d o e s n o t d i s p u t e t h a t h i s o f f e n s e s w e r e p r o p e r l y g r o u p e d t o g e t h e r f o r

p u r p o s e s o f d e t e r m i n i n g h i s c o m b i n e d o f f e n s e l e v e l u n d e r P a r t D o f C h a p t e r T h r e e

o f t h e S e n t e n c i n g G u i d e l i n e s

. A s M o o r e ’ s P r e s e n t e n c e I n v e s t i g a t i o n R e p o r t n o t e d

,

h i s “ u n r e s t r i c t e d ” g u i d e l i n e s r a n g e w a s 2 9 2 t o 3 6 2 m o n t h s b a s e d o n h i s o f f e n s e

l e v e l o f 3 8 a n d h i s c r i m i n a l h i s t o r y c a t e g o r y o f I I I

. H o w e v e r

, b e c a u s e t h e s t a t u t o r y

m a n d a t o r y m i n i m u m o f l i f e o n C o u n t O n e w a s g r e a t e r t h a n t h e h i g h e n d o f t h a t

g u i d e l i n e s r a n g e o f 3 6 2 m o n t h s

, M o o r e ’ s a d v i s o r y g u i d e l i n e s s e n t e n c e b e c a m e l i f e

i m p r i s o n m e n t p u r s u a n t t o U

. S

. S

. G

. § 5 G 1

. 1 ( b )

. I n s h o r t

, w h i l e l i f e w a s t h e 2

s t a t u t o r y m a n d a t o r y m i n i m u m o n C o u n t O n e

, l i f e w a s t h e a d v i s o r y g u i d e l i n e s

s e n t e n c e

, n o t t h e s t a t u t o r y m i n i m u m

, o n C o u n t T w o

.

F u r t h e r

, u n d e r U

. S

. S

. G

. § 5 G 1

. 2 ( b )

, w h e n t h e r e a r e m u l t i p l e c o u n t s o f

c o n v i c t i o n

, t h e s e n t e n c e i m p o s e d o n e a c h c o u n t i s t h e “ t o t a l p u n i s h m e n t ” a s

c a l c u l a t e d u n d e r t h e r e l e v a n t p o r t i o n s o f t h e g u i d e l i n e s

. T h e c o m m e n t a r y t o 3

See U.S.S.G. § 5G1.1(b) ( providing that a “sta tutorily require d minimum sentenc e” is 2

the g uideline sentenc e whe n it “is gr eate r than the ma x imum of the applicable g uideline ra ng e”)

.

Section 5G1.2(b) sta tes: 3

Ex cept as otherwise require d by law (see §5G1.1(a ),(b) ), the sentenc e imposed on

3§ 5 G 1

. 2 d e f i n e s “ t o t a l p u n i s h m e n t ” a s t h e “ c o m b i n e d l e n g t h o f t h e s e n t e n c e s

. ”

U

. S

. S

. G

. § 5 G 1

. 2 ( b ) c m t

. n

. 1

. B e c a u s e M o o r e f a c e d a m a n d a t o r y l i f

e s e n t e n c e o n

C o u n t O n e

, h i s “ c o m b i n e d l e n g t h o f s e n t e n c e s

, ” o r t o t a l p u n i s h m e n t

, w a s l i f e

.

M o o r e ’ s a r g u m e n t t h a t § 5 G 1

. 1 ( b ) a p p l i e s o n l y w h e n t h e r e a r e s i n g l e c o u n t s o f

c o n v i c t i o n i s u n a v a i l i n g

. S e c t i o n 5 G 1

. 2 ( b ) e x p l i c i t l y r e f e r s t o § 5 G 1

. 1 ( b ) i n

e x p l a i n i n g h o w t o d e t e r m i n e t h e t o t a l p u n i s h m e n t

.

T h e c o m m e n t a r y a l s o s t a t e s t h a t t h e s e n t e n c e s s h o u l d r u n c o n c u r r e n t l y “ t o

t h e e x t e n t a l l o w e d b y t h e s t a t u t o r y m a x i m u m s e n t e n c e o f i m p r i s o n m e n t f o r e a c h

c o u n t o f c o n v i c t i o n

. ” I d

. W h e r e a t l e a s t o n e c o u n t h a s a “ s t a t u t o r y m a x i m u m

a d e q u a t e t o p e r m i t i m p o s i t i o n o f t h e t o t a l p u n i s h m e n t a s t h e s e n t e n c e o n t h a t

c o u n t

, ” t h e n t h e s e n t e n c e s o n t h e o t h e r c o u n t s a r e “ s e t a t t h e l e s s e r o f t h e t o t a l

p u n i s h m e n t a n d t h e a p p l i c a b l e s t a t u t o r y m a x i m u m ” a n d a r e r u n c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h

t h e l o n g e s t s e n t e n c e

. I d

. ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d )

.

H e r e

, M o o r e ’ s “ t o t a l p u n i s h m e n t ” w a s l i f e i m p r i s o n m e n t

, a n d h i s a p p l i c a b l e

s t a t u t o r y m a x i m u m o n C o u n t T w o w a s a l s o l i f e i m p r i s o n m e n t

. T h u s

, t h e d i s t r i c t

c o u r t d i d n o t e r r i n c o n c l u d i n g t h a t M o o r e ’ s a d v i s o r y g u i d e l i n e s s e n t e n c e o n C o u n t

eac h other count shall be the total punishment as deter mined in acc ordanc e with Part

D of Chapter

Three , and Part C of this Chapter.

U.S.S.G. § 5G1.2(b). Part D of Chapter Thr ee a ddresse s how to g roup multiple counts of

conviction in order

to determine the combined off ense le vel used to ca lculate the a dvisory

g uidelines rang e. See U .S.S.G. §§ 3D1.1 to 3D1.5. Part C of Chapter 5 addr esses the

imposit ion of terms of imprisonment using the Sentencing Table a nd the applica tion of safe ty

valve r elief to c erta in statutory mandatory

minimum s. See U.S.S.G. §§ 5C1.1 to 5C 1.2.

4T w o w a s a c o n c u r r e n t l i f e s e n t e n c e

. 4

I I

. A d v i s o r y v

. M a n d a t o r y

T h e g o v e r n m e n t c o n c e d e s

, a n d w e a g r e e

, t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t a p p e a r s t o

h a v e m i s t a k e n l y b e l i e v e d t h a t a l i f e s e n t e n c e a s t o C o u n t T w o w a s m a n d a t o r y

r a t h e r t h a n a d v i s o r y

. H o w e v e r

, C o u n t T w o c a r r i e s a s t a t u t o r y m a n d a t o r y

m i n i m u m o f t e n y e a r s ’ i m p r i s o n m e n t

, n o t l i f e

. S e e 2 1 U

. S

. C

. § 8 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B )

( p r o v i d i n g t h a t

, i f a v i o l a t i o n i n v o l v e s f i v e g r a m s o r m o r e o f c o c a i n e b a s e a n d i f

t h e d e f e n d a n t h a s a p r i o r f

e l o n y d r u g c o n v i c t i o n

, t h e d e f e n d a n t f a c e s a t e r m o f

i m p r i s o n m e n t n o t “ l e s s t h a n 1 0 y e a r s a n d n o t m o r e t h a n l i f e i m p r i s o n m e n t ” )

.

W h i l e M o o r e ’ s a d v i s o r y g u i d e l i n e s r a n g e u n d e r C o u n t T w o w a s l i f e i m p r i s o n m e n t

,

t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d t o t h e e x t e n t i t t r e a t e d t h a t g u i d e l i n e s r a n g e a s b i n d i n g

. S e e

U n i t e d S t a t e s v

. B o o k e r

, 5 4 3 U

. S

. 2 2 0

, 2 4 6

, 1 2 5 S

. C t

. 7 3 8

, 7 5 7 ( 2 0 0 5 ) ( h o l d i n g

t h a t t h e S e n t e n c i n g G u i d e l i n e s a r e a d v i s o r y r a t h e r t h a n m a n d a t o r y )

.

A c c o r d i n g l y

, w e a f

f i r m t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s c a l c u l a t i o n o f C o u n t T w o ’ s

We also rejec t Moore’s a rg ument that the district court wa s require d to hold a 4

rese ntencing hear ing. I

n Moore I , this Court i ssued only a limited remand a s to Count Two; i t

did not vacate Moore’ s sentence in its entirety . Fur ther, g iven that this Court affirmed Moor e’s

life sentenc e on Count One, a ny sentenc e imposed on re mand as to Count Two would not have

made Moore ’s total sentenc e more onerous. See United States v. Tamay o, 80 F.3d 1514, 1518-

20 (11th Cir. 1996) (c oncluding that the district court doe s not commit reversible e rror in failing

to give the def

endant a n opportunity

to allocute during rese ntencing when the r emand wa s

limit ed and “ the modification does not make the sentenc e more onerous” ); United States v.

Tay lor, 11 F.3d 149, 151 ( 11th Cir. 1994) (conc luding that a defe ndant’s rig ht to be prese nt and

allocute e x tends to rese ntencing when the “ orig inal sentenc ing pa ckag e is vac ated in its entirety

on appea l and a c ase is re manded f or re sentenc ing” ).

5g u i d e l i n e s s e n t e n c e o f l i f e i m p r i s o n m e n t

, b u t v a c a t e M o o r e ’ s s e n t e n c e a s t o C o u n t

T w o a n d r e m a n d t o p e r m i t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o r e s e n t e n c e M o o r e o n C o u n t T w o i n

l i g h t o f t h e a d v i s o r y n a t u r e o f t h a t g u i d e l i n e s s e n t e n c e a n d t h e f a c t o r s i n 1 8 U

. S

. C

.

§ 3 5 5 3 ( a )

. W e e x p r e s s n o o p i n i o n

, h o w e v e r

, a s t o w h a t s e n t e n c e t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t

5

s h o u l d i m p o s e a f

t e r c o n s i d e r i n g t h e a d v i s o r y g u i d e l i n e s s e n t e n c e a n d t h e § 3 5 5 3 ( a )

f a c t o r s

.

A F F I R M E D I N P A R T

, V A C A T E D I N P A R T A N D R E M A N D E D

.

As this is a lim ited rema

nd, the par

ties may not rea rg ue issues alre ady

and nec essar ily 5

decide d during the pre vious sentencing proce eding s that either ha ve bee n aff irmed on appe al or

could have been but we re not ra ised on appe al. See United States v. D avis, 329 F.3d 1250, 1252

(11th Cir. 2003) (e x plaining tha t when the a ppellate c ourt issues a limited mandate, “ the trial

court is re stricted in the ra ng e of issues it may

consider on r emand” ).

6