Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:11-cr-00075-BO-1)
Submitted:
GREGORY,
Decided:
Circuit
Judges,
July 5, 2012
and
HAMILTON,
PER CURIAM:
Carlos Demont Watson
intent
to
distribute
cocaine
base,
in
violation
of
21
base, in
On
appeal, Watson argues that the district court erred by: (1)
applying a three-level sentencing enhancement for his role as a
manager
or
supervisor
in
the
offense,
pursuant
to
U.S.
Finding
district
courts
factual
findings
regarding
We review
sentencing
it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the
definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
United
States
v.
Harvey,
532
F.3d
326,
336
(4th
Cir.
2008)
under
USSG
three-level
is
sentencing
warranted
if
the
enhancement
defendant
was
manager
or
an
enhancement,
the
defendant
must
The
enhancement
is
appropriate
To qualify for
have
managed
or
where
the
evidence
participants
United
States
v.
or
exercised
Slade,
631
F.3d
management
185,
190
responsibility.
(4th
Cir.
2011)
(citing United States v. Bartley, 230 F.3d 667, 673-74 (4th Cir.
2000)).
In
determining
whether
an
enhancement
under
USSG
States
v.
Kellam,
568
F.3d
125,
148
(4th
Cir.
2009)
Brittany
within
Williams,
USSG
to
make
3B1.1(b).
We
him
manager
disagree.
or
Watson
court
found
the
district
courts
enhancement
to
be
erroneous.
defendants
cousin,
an
unindicted
co-conspirator,
drove
the
that
he
did
so
as
result
of
any
exercise
of
Id. at
191.
However, unlike Slade, Williams did not simply drive
Watson to various location to deliver drugs; rather, Watson hid
drugs outside of
Williams
locate the drugs, who would be picking up the drugs, and how
much she should collect.
supervisory
control
over
uncle,
Raymond
Harris,
who
he
Given that
Watson exercised control over both his girlfriend and his uncle,
4
enhancement
for
Watsons
role
as
manager
or
for
to
possession
USSG
of
firearm
2D1.1(b)(1),
during
the
two-level
offense.
sentencing
the
improbable
defendant
that
the
was
weapon
convicted,
was
unless
connected
it
with
is
the
clearly
offense.
conduct
or
common
scheme
as
the
offense
of
conviction,
United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 628-29 (4th Cir. 2010)
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted),
even
in
the
absence
of
850, 852 (4th Cir. 1997) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted).
firearm
and
his
narcotic
offense
is
clearly
improbable.
asserts
that
the
two-level
sentencing
offense
was
not
supported
by
credible
evidence.
firearms
charges
or
convictions
and
the
confidential
in
applying
two-level
sentencing
enhancement
for
from
the
respective
debriefings
of
witnesses,
As
the
Watson
in
close
proximity
to
black
semi-automatic
Although
witnesses,
he
Watson
fails
to
questions
the
establish
that
credibility
his
of
possession
these
of
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
facts
and
legal
AFFIRMED