Third Circuit Vacates Sentence for Plain Error Due to Improper Sentencing Guideline Calculation
In United States v. Bell, 2018 WL 1432956, the Third Circuit vacated an improperly assigned sentence.
Bell pled guilty to the offense of felon in possession of a firearm. He was enhanced at sentencing due to the ACCA and his priors.
Bell’s first ground for appeal, that his priors did not meet the standard for the ACCA was denied.
Bell’s second ground was that his sentence was improperly calculated. The PSI calculated his sentence at 37 and assessed a three-level downward variance for acceptance of responsibility down to 34. When combined with his criminal history category of IV, his sentencing range came out to 262-327 months. The court adopted the PSI and granted a downward variance to 202 months.
Bell argued that his offense level should have started at 34 under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4(b)(3)(A) which after the three-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility would put him at a 31 (note: level 31 criminal history category 6 would be 188–235 months on the 2016 manual). The government conceded this to be accurate AND conceded this to be plain error under Rule 52(b) and Molina Martinez v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1338, 1345 (2016) “When a defendant is sentenced under an incorrect Guidelines range—whether or not the defendant's ultimate sentence falls within the correct range—the error itself can, and most often will, be sufficient to show a reasonable probability of a different outcome absent the error.”
The Third Circuit vacated the sentence and remanded it back to the district court. United States v. Bell, 2018 WL 143295