Opinion ID: 604939
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: sentence enhancement for possession of cocaine base (crack)

Text: 30 Johnson contends that the term cocaine base as used in 21 U.S.C. § 841 (Supp.1993) and in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, is unconstitutionally vague. Johnson's argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Williams, 876 F.2d 1521 (11th Cir.1989), in which this court held that Congress' failure to define cocaine base did not render the statute unconstitutional. Johnson relies on authority from other circuits to buttress his argument. We decline the opportunity to revisit this issue and instead reaffirm our holding in Williams. The evidence supports a finding that Johnson possessed cocaine base and the district court properly sentenced Johnson pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1. 31 J. SENTENCE ENHANCEMENT FOR POSSESSION OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON 32 The district court, applying U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) 7 , enhanced Johnson's base offense level by two points for possession of a dangerous weapon. Johnson argues that his sentence enhancement was improper because there was no showing that he actually possessed or used any weapons. However, a co-conspirator's sentence may be enhanced for possession of a dangerous weapon if (1) the possessor is charged as a conspirator, (2) the defendant who's sentence is to be enhanced was a member of the conspiracy at the time of the firearm possession; and (3) the possession of the firearm was in furtherance of the conspiracy. U.S. v. Martinez, 924 F.2d 209, 210 (11th Cir.1991), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 203, 116 L.Ed.2d 163 (1991). All of these elements are satisfied in the instant case. Four weapons were seized from Roberson's house. Roberson was charged and convicted as a conspirator. Three of the weapons were concealed in a room with 3.7 grams of crack. The district court's finding that possession of the weapons was in furtherance of the conspiracy is supported not only by the proximity of the weapons to the crack, but also by this court's recognition that firearms are tools of illegal narcotics trafficking. Terzado-Madruga, supra. Therefore, application of the two point enhancement was not clearly erroneous. 33 K. REDUCTION OF SENTENCE FOR ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY 34 Johnson asserts that he should have been granted a two point reduction for acceptance of responsibility because he admitted his limited involvement in the charges. In order to qualify for acceptance of responsibility, the sentencing guidelines specify that Johnson must truthfully [admit] the conduct comprising the offense(s) of conviction, and truthfully [admit] or not falsely [deny] any additional relevant conduct for which he is accountable. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 application note 1(a). A defendant who falsely denies or frivolously contests relevant conduct that the court determines to be true has acted in a manner inconsistent with acceptance of responsibility. Id. Johnson has never admitted to being part of the conspiracy, despite the jury's verdict. Johnson's denial of his involvement in the conspiracy justifies the district court's denial of credit for acceptance of responsibility.