United States v. Michael James Sandsness

Good Law
93 Daily Journal DAR 3172·988 F.2d 970·1993 WL 63033·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 4290·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1767
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 10, 199392-30131California1,182 words

Opinion

Opinion

Beezer, J.

Michael Sandsness appeals his sentence for selling drug paraphernalia in interstate commerce. He claims that 21 U.S.C. § 857 (1988) (now 21 U.S.C. § 863 (1992)), the statute defining the crime to which he pleaded guilty, is vague and overbroad. He also claims that the sentencing judge erred in enhancing his sentence for his managerial role in the offense because the statute is vague as applied with respect to other sales to which he did not plead guilty. We affirm.

Defendant managed two stores in Oregon which sold grow lights, electrical transformers, and other items which have innocent uses. This equipment can also be used to grow marijuana indoors. An employee with knowledge that the merchan dise was to be used for the production of marijuana sold some of the items to a government undercover agent. The defendant entered an Alford plea:

The government recommended several upward adjustments in the offense level. The court increased the sentence two levels in light of the defendant’s managerial status under United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual (U.S.S.G.), § 3Bl.l(c) (Nov. 1991):

Judge Hogan sentenced the defendant to 16 months in prison, the maximum sentence at…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.