11-4933 (L) United States v. Stith & Brantley
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
_______________
August Term, 2012
(Argued: March 6, 2013 Decided: May 30, 2013)
Docket Nos. 11-4933-cr(L) & 11-4935-cr(con)
________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee,
v.
EDWIN MONTANEZ, AKA SHA, AKA SHA DIC, AKA SHADIGGA, AKA SHY, KEN KINSEY, JR., AKA BENJI, AKA JADE, KARRIEM WILLIAMS, AKA CALO, LARRY BENTON, AKA WEEZY, AKA LIL WAYNE, AKA SQUEEZY, QUANTAE WRIGHT, AKA LITTLE NOVA, ANDRE ROBINSON, AKA DRE DRE, AKA TEAM, MARC L. STANLEY, AKA IMF, ROBERT MURRAY, AKA KILLA, AKA KILLER, PATRICK BRUMFIELD, AKA P-DOG, MATTHEW BRUMFIELD, AKA AUGUSTUS, AKA STALLION, BOBBY EVERSON, AKA PINO, AKA STYLES, JEFFREY JOHNSON, AKA BLING,
Defendants,
CLIFTON STITH, AKA TONY, AKA YAYO, ADIB BRANTLEY, AKA SHA BLOOD,
Defendants-Appellants.
________________________________________________________
Before: KATZMANN, PARKER, Circuit Judges, and KUNTZ, District Judge.*
Appeal from two orders entered on November 16, 2011 by the United States District
Court for the Northern District of New York (Mordue, J.), which reduced the Defendants-
* The Honorable William F. Kuntz, II, of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation. Appellants' terms of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), but declined to depart or vary
in any respect from the Defendants-Appellants' amended guideline ranges. We hold that
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) prohibited the district court from departing or varying from the
Defendants-Appellants' amended guideline ranges, and that the scope of this prohibition
included departures under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3. AFFIRMED.
_______________
Counsel for Appellee: PAUL D. SILVER (John M. Katko, on the brief), Assistant United States Attorneys, for Richard S. Hartunian, United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Albany, NY
Counsel for Defendants-Appellants: JAMES P. EGAN (Lisa A. Peebles, on the brief), Federal Public Defender's Office, Syracuse, NY.
_______________
PER CURIAM:
This case presents two issues: (1) whether U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) constitutes a valid
exercise of the United States Sentencing Commission's authority, and thus binds district courts
whenever they reduce a defendant's sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); and (2) whether,
even if § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) binds district courts, it nonetheless permits them to depart from a
defendant's amended guideline range under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3. Defendants-Appellants Adib
Brantley and Clifton Stith appeal from two orders entered on November 16, 2011 by the United
States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Mordue, J.). In those orders, the
district court reduced Brantley's and Stith's terms of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2). Nonetheless, the district court concluded that U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A)
prohibited it from reducing Brantley's and Stith's sentences "to a term [of imprisonment] that is
less than the minimum of the[ir] amended guideline range[s]." Based on this conclusion, the
district court declined to grant Brantley's and Stith's request for a departure under U.S.S.G.
§ 4A1.3, even though it had previously departed under that provision at the Defendants-
Appellants' initial sentencings.
On appeal, Brantley and Stith argue that the district court erred in concluding that
§ 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) prohibited it from