Court Opinion

ID: 1003281
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 18:24:16.96493+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:38:20.631951
License: Public Domain

Case vacated and remanded by
Supreme Court order filed 11/27/00
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                             No. 99-4804

STEVEN LAVOUR TWITTY,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill.
Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
(CR-98-826)

Submitted: April 25, 2000

Decided: May 23, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Langdon D. Long, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Rene Josey, United States Attorney,
Marshall Prince, Assistant United States Attorney, Ann Agnew Cupp,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Steven Lavour Twitty pled guilty to knowing and intentional pos-
session with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, in violation
of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(a)(1) (West 1999). The district court found at
sentencing that Twitty was responsible for over 1.5 kilograms of the
drugs. Twitty was sentenced to 500 months imprisonment followed
by five years of supervised release.

Twitty argues on appeal that the threshold drug amounts set forth
in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b) are elements of the offense, which must be
alleged in the indictment, rather than sentencing factors. Because the
drug quantity was not mentioned in the indictment, Twitty claims that
the sentence imposed by the district court is invalid. Twitty relies on
the Supreme Court's holding in Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227
(1999), to support his claim. In Jones, the Court held in relation to the
federal carjacking statute that a factor that substantially increases a
sentence is an element of the offense that must be charged in the
indictment. Under § 841(b), the quantity of drugs involved in the
offense affects the length of the sentence.

Several circuits have addressed the impact of Jones on § 841(b).
No court has extended the holding in Jones to § 841(b), concluding
that drug quantity is a sentencing factor under the statute. United
States v. Jackson, ___ F.3d ___, 2000 WL 298575 (7th Cir. 2000);
United States v. Thomas, 204 F.3d 381, 384 (2d Cir. 2000), petition
for cert. filed, ___ U.S. ___ (U.S. March 24, 2000) (No. 99-8779);
United States v. Hester, 199 F.3d 1287, 1291 92 (11th Cir. 2000);
United States v. Jones, 194 F.3d 1178, 1183-86 (10th Cir. 1999), peti-
tion for cert. filed, ___ U.S.L.W. ___ (U.S. Feb. 10, 2000) (No. 99-
8176). We join those courts, and decline to extend the reasoning in
Jones to § 841(b).

Therefore, we affirm Twitty's conviction and sentence. We deny
Twitty's motion to stay the appellate decision. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre-
sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

                   2