2002 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

7-29-2002

USA v. Prunty

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 01-3978

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2002 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"USA v. Prunty" (2002). 2002 Decisions. Paper 456.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002/456
 NOT PRECEDENTIAL 

 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 ___________ 

 No. 01-3978 

 ___________ 

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 

 v. 

 KAREEM PRUNTY 

 a/k/a TOMMIE BROWN 

 Kareem Prunty, 

 Appellant 

 _______________________________________________ 

 On Appeal from the United States District Court 

 for the District of New Jersey 

 D.C. Criminal No. 98-cr-00357 

 (Honorable John W. Bissell) 

 ___________________ 

 Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) 

 July 15, 2002 

 Before: SCIRICA, ALITO and FUENTES, Circuit Judges 

 (Filed July 29, 2002) 

 __________________ 

 OPINION OF THE COURT 

 __________________ 

SCIRICA, Circuit Judge. 

 The issue in this sentencing appeal is whether the District Court erred in applying 

a four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 3B1.1(a) (1998) for the defendant’s role as 

organizer or leader of a criminal offense involving five or more participants. 

 I. 

 In 1997, Tyrell Moore provided Kareem Prunty with false identification 

documents in the name of "Edward Hill" which Prunty used to purchase guns in West 

Virginia. Prunty later gave the "Edward Hill" identification papers to Chester Spriggs, 

who used them to buy additional guns in West Virginia. Prunty and Ronnie Seamon 

traveled to West Virginia to purchase firearms, which they transported back to New 

Jersey for resale. Several weapons were stored at the home of DeCarlos Brown, who sold 

some of them. Mark Dean also purchased guns at Prunty’s request at the West Virginia 

hardware store. 

 On June 5, 1998, Prunty, Dean, Moore, Seamon and Spriggs were jointly charged 

in a 15-count indictment. Under a plea agreement, Prunty pled guilty to conspiracy to 

traffic in firearms in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. 371 in 

exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts. The District Court accepted Prunty’s 
guilty plea. 

 The pre-sentence report adopted stipulations in the plea agreement and 

recommended a four-level aggravating role enhancement under U.S.S.G. 3B1.1(a) for 

organizing or leading the conspiracy. At sentencing, the District Court adopted these 

findings and enhanced Prunty’s sentence four levels under U.S.S.G. 3B1.1(a). The 

District Court specifically found Prunty organized or led a criminal activity involving 

five or more participants. 

 The District Court imposed a forty-eight month prison sentence, three years of 

supervised release, a $1000 fine and a $100 special assessment. In a proceeding for 

collateral relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255, the District Court reinstated Prunty’s right to 

appeal nunc pro tunc because his prior attorney failed to comply with his request to 

appeal. This appeal followed. 

 II. 

 Prunty contends the District Court erred by enhancing his sentence under U.S.S.G. 

 3B1.1(a) because the evidence was insufficient to prove he organized or led the 

criminal activity. We review the District Court’s factual determinations for clear error. 

"We will reverse only if we are left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has 

been made. We may not reverse if the district court’s findings are plausible in light of 

the record viewed in its entirety." United States v. Barrie, 267 F.3d 220, 223 (3d Cir. 

2001) (quotations and citations omitted). 

 Prunty claims his admission that he participated in a conspiracy to obtain and 

transport firearms does not support the four-level enhancement. We disagree. 

Application Note 4 to U.S.S.G. 3B1.1 enumerates factors the sentencing court should 

consider in determining whether the defendant was an organizer or leader. Those factors 

include: 

 the exercise of decision making authority, the nature of participation 

 in the commission of the offense, the recruitment of accomplices, 

 the claimed right to a larger share of the fruits of the crime, the 

 degree of participation in planning or organizing the offense, the 

 nature and scope of the illegal activity, and the degree of control and 

 authority exercised over others. 

The evidence indicates that Prunty was an organizer or leader. He recruited at least two 

other participants (Dean and DeCarlos Brown). He bankrolled Dean’s purchase of the 

firearms and paid Dean for his participation. Prunty was personally involved in all 

aspects of the conspiracy - including sales, purchasing, shipping, and firearms delivery. 

This evidence was sufficient for the sentencing court to conclude Prunty organized and 

led a criminal offense involving five or more participants. See United States v. Felton, 55 

F.3d 861 (3d Cir. 1995); United States v. Ortiz, 878 F.2d 125 (3d Cir. 1989). 

 III. 

 For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgment of the District Court. 

 

 

 /s/ Anthony J. Scirica 

 Circuit Judge