Opinion ID: 75947
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: introduction

Text: 33 The initial indictment was filed on January 5, 1999. The jury trial began on September 7, 1999, and concluded with the guilty verdicts against all six defendants on October 21, 1999. The sentencing hearings began on December 30, 1999, and concluded on January 7, 2000. 34 Sentencing issues abound in this case. The decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), had not yet been filed, but, as acknowledged by the district court during the sentencing hearings, the pivotal decisions in United States v. Dale, 178 F.3d 429 (6th Cir.1999), and United States v. Rhynes, 196 F.3d 207 (4th Cir.1999), had been issued. The Dale-Rhynes decisions addressed the sentencing problem that arises where the government alleges a conspiracy of multiple controlled substances (in this case, cocaine and marijuana), there is no special verdict as to either substance, and the maximum sentences for an unspecified amount of each substance differ. 32 35 The drug conspiracy alleged in Count 1 described two controlled substances as objects of the conspiracy: cocaine and marijuana. All six defendants were found guilty of this count. The Government concedes that the jury's verdict as to Count 1 is a general verdict, not a special verdict, and that Count 1 did not allege a quantity of either cocaine or marijuana. 33 36 Major and Godfrey were convicted of Count 1 only. Major was sentenced to a term of 240 months and Godfrey to life imprisonment. Stokes was convicted of Count 1 and Count 19, but of no substantive drug offense. Stokes was sentenced to life in prison. Smith and Gallashaw were convicted of the substantive drug offenses set forth in Counts 10 (marijuana) and 11 (cocaine). Allen and Gallashaw were convicted of the substantive drug offenses set forth in Count 4 (cocaine). Smith and Gallashaw were sentenced to life in prison. Allen was sentenced to 420 months. 34 37 As with the conspiracy count, Counts 4, 10, and 11 did not allege any specific quantity of the controlled substance and the jury was not asked to make such a finding. 35 38 We shall first address the Dale-Rhynes issue because all six defendants are affected by the analysis.