Scrivner

United States v. Scrivner

Good Law
114 F.3d 964·97 Daily Journal DAR 7281·1997 WL 307234·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 13602·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4364
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 10, 1997Nos. 95-30227, 95-30239, 95-30240California3,050 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Nelson, J.

Richard Lee Scrivner, Barbara Lammsies Scrivner, and George Michael Gray were convicted of various crimes associated with the manufacture and possession of methamphetamine pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We hold that the district court did not commit plain error in sentencing these defendants on the basis of the general guideline calculation for “methamphetamine” without classifying the charged substance as D-methamphetamine or L-methamphetamine.

I. INTRODUCTION

Following a series of searches and arrests by local law enforcement authorities, the Serivners and Gray were convicted on charges of conspiracy and manufacturing and possessing with intent to distribute methamphetamine. The presentence reports (PSRs) attributed 108 kilograms of methamphetamine to each of the Serivners, and 124 kilograms to Gray.

Because the convictions were under 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1), the PSRs first referred to Section 2Dl.l(a)(3) of the sentencing guidelines, and then used the Drug Quantity Table found in Section 2D1.1 (c) to reach base offense levels for each defendant. At the time the Serivners and Gray were sentenced, Application Note 10 to the Commentary following Section 2D1.1…

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.