## In the



# U n ited S ta tes Co urt o f Ap p ea ls

F o rth eS e v e n th C ir cu it
N o. 07

- 3849 U NI T ED S TATE SOF A MERI CA, P la intif f-A pp ellee, v. H ARV EY C. J ACK S ON I V, D e f e ndan t

- Appe l l ant
.
A pp eal from the United S t ates Di stric tC our t fo r the S outhernDi stric to f I llino is. No . 06 -CR-301 36 -DRH

—David R. H ern don, Chief Ju dge
.
A RG UE D J AN UA RY 12, 2009

— D ECI DE D F EB RU AR Y 18, 2009

Befo re E A S T E RB R OO K, Chi e f Judg e, a nd W I L L I A MSa nd S YKES, C ircu it Judges . E A S TE RB R OO K, Chi e

f Judg e . H ar vey J acks on pl eaded gu ilty to t w o d ru g c rim es p lu s p os se ss in g fire ar m s in furth eran ce of a d rug-traffi cking offense. 18 U

. S. C

. §924(c). Befo re bei ng se ntenced he soughtto withdraw the pl ea on the weapons c ou n t w hi l e l eavi ng the gui l ty ple as on othe r counts i n pla ce. T h e d istri ct c ourthel d a hear i ng, concl ud ed that J acks on’ s t est i m ony about the nature of his l aw yer ’ s a dvic e ( and the s tat e o fhi s o w n knowle dge)2 N o. 07

- 3849

w as diss i m ula ti on, and denie d the m oti on. J acks on was s e n t e n c e d t o a t o t a l o f8 7mo n t h s ’ i mpr i s o n me nt

— 27 on each dr ug convi cti on ( to run co ncurr entl y) , f ol l owed by 60 on the fi re ar m s char ge. J acks on does notpre ss i n thi s co urt hi s co ntenti on that hi s l aw yerm i sl ed hi m about the nature ofthe charg es an d the l i k el y c o nseq ue nces o fa g ui l typl ea . I ns te ad he co nt en ds th athe i s i nn ocen t o fthe c ha r g e be ca us e he posse sse d the g uns f orhi s pro tect i on

— an d D i s t r i ctof C o lum bia v. Heller, 1 28 S

. Ct

. 2 78 3 ( 20 08 ) , ho l ds th at th e Consti tuti on’ s s eco nd am endm ent e nti tl es peopl e t o ha ve ha ndg uns i n the ho m e f o r s el f

- pr o te ct i o n. T h e C ou rt sa id inHellerthatthe C on stituti on e nti tl es ci ti zens to kee p and bear arm s f orthe pu rpos e o fl awfu l sel f

- prot ecti on, notf orall se l f

- prot ecti on. J acks on was dist ributi ng i l l ega l drugs ( coca i ne and unli censed d ex t ro m et h or p h an h yd ro b ro m id e t ab let s) o u t o f h is hom e. The Consti tuti on does notgi ve anyo n e the r i ght t o be a rm ed w h ile com m i tti ng a f el ony, o r eve n to have g un s i n t he n e xtr o o m f o r e mer g e nc y u se s ho ul d s up pl i er s, c us to m er s, o r the po l i ce thr ea te n a dea l er ’ s st as h. J acks on s ays thathe l i ved i n a dangero us nei ghbor hood and w anted to pro tecthi m sel ffro m burg l ar s a nd o ther m ar auders. That m ay be so, but hi s deci si on t o oper ate an i l l ega l hom e busi ness al so m att er s. Suppose a federal statu te said : “A ny one w ho ch ooses to p ossess a firearm i n the hom e f orse l f

- prot ection is forbi dd en to ke ep or dist ribute i l l ega l drugs ther e. ” S uch a s tatu te w oul d be val i d, as J acks on’ s l aw yerco nceded. A nd i f Congre ss m ay f orbi d people wh o posse ss gu n s to deal drugs, i t m ayN o. 07

- 3849 3 f orbi d people wh o deal drugs to possess guns. The st ate
m e n t s “ i fy ou h av e a gu n, you ca n ’t s ell c oc ain e” an d “if yo u se ll coc ain e, yo u ca n ’t h av e a gu n ” a re id en tic al. S o the r e i s no c o ns ti tu ti o na l pr o bl em w ith se par at i ng g uns f r o m dr ug s, an d th e r i g ht que st i o n i s whethe r the re cor d con ta in s a f actualbas i s f orthe ple a o fgui l ty. Se c tio n 92 4(c ) m ak e s it a c rim e t o p os se ss a fire ar m “in further ance o f ” a drug- tr affi cki ng o f f ense. J acks on obs er ves that age nts f ound the guns i n the bedro om o f hi s apa r tment, whi l e th e dr ug s w er e pr epa r ed, k ept, a nd sol d i n other ro om s. H i s pro bl em i s tha t h e has r epeatedl y s ai d t h at h e pos ses sed the guns to pro tect h i ms e l fw h i l e a th o me

— an d i t was fr o m hi s ho m e th athe dist ributed i l l ega l drugs. The r eco rd con ta ins a re portby a fede ral d rug-con trol agen t sum m ar iz in g Jackson ’s sta tem ents an d o bser vi ng tha t a drug deal er wh o speaks of“pro tect i on” m eans prot ecti on o f the drug busi ness, for th at is w he re the p rincipa l risk lie s. (Dru g d ealers are m uc h mor e l i k el y t o b e r o bb ed by s uppl i er s an d c us t o mer s tha n a h o us e ho l de r chos e n a tr a nd o m i s a pt to b e th e su bj ec t o fb ur g l ary , b ecau se the s uppl i er s an d cus to m er s k no w tha t th e dr ugpur ve y o r c an ’t tur n t o the pol i ce f orhel p; thi s m ake s deal er s e speci al l y a ttr acti ve tar get s. ) The wri tte n ple a a gr eem ents t a t e s tha t“ po s s ess i on [ ofthe guns] was i n further ance o fthe d rug cri m e descr ibed i n count 2” ( d ist ributi ng co cai ne)

. J acks on r eprese n te d th at h e “ a g re es an d ad m its ” t h is e lem en t. In open co urt the j ud ge ask ed J acks on wh etherhe had rea d the pl ea agr eem ent a nd st oo d by hi s r epres enta tions; J acks on ( w ho i s l i ter ate ) sa i d yes. That’ s a n adequate f actualbas i s f orthe ple a. The j ud ge al so en su red that4 N o. 07

- 3849 J ac k so n h ad di sc us se d the f ac ts , the l eg alst an dar ds, a nd p ot en tia l d efe n se s t h or ou gh ly w ith co u n se l. A t the hear i ng o n hi s m oti on t o w i thd ra w the ple a, J acks on co ntra dict ed these r epres entat i ons. The j ud ge f ound that he had tol d the t ruth when enter i n g the pl ea an d was l y i ngi n a n a tt empt t o g eto uto fit. “ [ T] he Court fi nd s t h e on l y t i m es that J acks on t ol d the t ruth a s to thi s m att er a re in h is S ti pu l ati on o fFa cts [ i n the ple a agr eem ent] and duri ng the Rule 11 hea ring

. ” J acks on sho ul d c o un t hi mse l f l uc k y t ha t he ha s no t be en pr o se cut ed f o r p erj ur y , 1 8 U. S

. C. § 16 21 , o r maki ngi nc o nsisten t d eclarations u nd er oath , 18 U .S

. C

. §1623 (c). T he re w ou ld b e few er self-serving an d self-cont rad ictory effo rt s t o a vo id on e’s c o m m itm en ts if p ro se c u to rs h eld defe nd ants to thei r sta tem ents w hen ple adinggui l ty. A FFI RMED

2- 18- 09