Legal Document

532 U.S. 59121 S.Ct. 1276149 L.Ed.2d 197 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of United States Reports. Readers are requested notify Reporter Decisions, Supreme Court States, Washington, D. C. 20543, any typographical or other errors, order that corrections may be made goes press.PAULA L. BUFORD, PETITIONERv.UNITED STATES No. 99-9073. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED Argued January 8, 2001 Decided March 20, Syllabus The Sentencing Guidelines, as relevant here, define a career offender one with at least two prior felony convictions for violent drug-related crimes and provide sentencing judge must count single conviction all "related" convictions, advising they when, inter alia, were consolidated sentencing. Seventh Circuit has held because might have been sentencing, hence related, even if court did not enter consolidation order, should decide whether such nonetheless functionally consolidated, meaning factually logically related was joint. Petitioner Buford pleaded guilty armed bank robbery. At Government conceded her four robbery but concede drug robberies. District decided cases had either formally functionally, affirmed, reviewing Court's decision deferentially rather than de novo. Held: Deferential review appropriate when an appeals reviews trial court's Guideline determination offender's federal statute requires only "accept" district "findings fact" (unless "clearly erroneous"), also "give due deference application guidelines facts." 18 U.S.C. 3742(e) (emphasis added). "deference depends on nature question presented." Koon v. 518 81, 98. Although argues here-applying term undisputed facts-demands no all, better position appellate individual circumstances demonstrate functional consolidation. Experience trials, procedures will help draw proper inferences from procedural descriptions provided. In addition, factual nuance closely guide legal decision, results depending heavily upon understanding significance case-specific details. And decision's fact-bound limits value precedent, which minimal courts consider circumstances, state systems, crimes. Insofar greater uniformity necessary, Commission can it. Pp. 4-7. 201 F.3d 937, affirmed. ON WRIT CERTIORARI TO APPEALS FOR SEVENTH CIRCUIT Breyer, J., delivered unanimous Court. Opinion Justice Breyer 1 case raises narrow law. What standard applies "related," purposes sentencing? particular, novo? We conclude, Appeals, deferential appropriate, we affirm. 2 * A 3 issue focused aspect Guidelines' treatment "career offenders," category particularly severe punishment. Guidelines offender" "at convictions" Commission, Manual 4B1.1 (Nov. 2000) (USSG). same time, those another. USSG 4B1.2(c), comment., n. 3; 4A1.2(a)(2). advise (in note) another "were . sentencing." 4A1.2, 3. 4 refined this "prior conviction" doctrine yet further. It "consolidated sentencing," See Joseph, 50 401, 404, cert. denied, 516 U. S 847 (1995). instance, said, "functionally consolidated," means "factually joint." 940 (2000) B 5 concerns "functional consolidation." Paula robbery, crime violence, court. Buford's five 1992 Wisconsin state-court another, consequently counted conviction, more one. 6 These involved series gas station All criminal indictment, time (prior offenses sentencing"). 7 concede, however, fifth crime, four. (possession of, intent deliver, cocaine) taken place about fourth claimed robberies motivated by addiction. But evidentiary link among police discovered cocaine searching house after arrest Moreover, entered. State charged offense separate indictment assigned different prosecutor handle case. heard plead charge hearing date; prosecutors appeared court, discussing drugs, robberies; entered judgments. 8 Buford, without denying these facts, pointed that, view, showed "consolidated" rendering "related." She out sent very who accepted plea charge; arguments proceeding; issued sentences time; judge, having imposed three (6 years 12 robberies, 15 two), ordered run concurrently. 9 Court, placing weight former latter, functionally. appealed. Appeals found consolidation" close one, wrote "the dispositive." F.3d, 940. "deferentially" "de novo." Id., 942. it affirmed decision. Ibid. 10 sought certiorari. light Circuits' approaches problem, granted writ. Compare Irons, 196 634, 638 (CA6 1999) (relatedness reviewed clear error); Wiseman, 172 1196, 1219 (CA10) (same), 528 889 (1999); Mapp, 170 328, 338 (CA2) 901 Maza, 93 1390, 1400 (CA8 1996) 519 1138 (1997); Mullens, 65 1560, 1565 (CA11 1995), 517 1112 (1996) Garcia, 962 F.2d 479, 481 (CA5) novo), 506 902 (1992); Davis, 922 1385, 1388 (CA9 1991) (same). II 11 arguing novo review, points she contested underlying fact. disagrees conclusion label-"functional consolidation"-failed fit facts. concedes, must, circumstance does dispose question. That kind determination-application facts-that here. Hence answer what "deference" "due." And, noted 98 (1996), presented all. say, "due" deference; facts dispute, witness credibility important. adds clarify make meaningful consolidation-related principles issue. says avoid inconsistent determinations consolidation, thereby furthering effort bring consistency 13 Despite arguments, believe right Koon, based our selection abuse-of-discretion relative institutional advantages enjoyed making type id., 98-99; cf. Miller Fenton, 474 104, 114 (1985) (deference depend "one judicial actor positioned question"). concluded there special competence helped appropriate. true here well. particular set demonstrates 14 so sees many "consolidations" judge. As likely familiar practices general, including procedures. regularly classify defendants' histories, aware typically follow. consolidations supra, 98-99 (District detailed experience favored review); Cooter & Gell Hartmarx Corp., 496 384, 403-404 (1990) (fact-intensive impose sanctions under Federal Rule Civil Procedure appropriate); Pierce Underwood, 487 552, 560 (1988) familiarity warranted Government's "substantially justified"). like example, doctrine, Judge usefully considered details determine connections crimes, than, administrative convenience, led sentence simultaneously concurrently offenses. 404; Russell, 200, 204 (CA7 1993). 16 Nor determinative heightened benefits contends result review. minor, detailed, interstitial law, buried interpretation note Guideline. generally recurring, purely matter, interpreting words, guideline, their basic intent. readily resolved reference general standards alone. Rather, grows bounded by, circumstances. event, itself gathers information courts, views process whole, developed broad perspective throughout Nation, can, adjusting notes, produce consistent similarly situated offenders sentenced courts. Cf. Braxton 500 344, 347-348 (1991) (Congress intended play primary role resolving conflicts over Guidelines). III 17 comparatively expertise limited uniform conclude properly deferentially. judgment Affirmed.

Classification Label: 0