United States v. Howard Eugene Leasure

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 1577·319 F.3d 1092·2003 WL 262204·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1237·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 2206
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 10, 200301-50395California3,738 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wardlaw, J.

Howard Eugene Leasure appeals his sentence and conviction for establishing a narcotics manufacturing laboratory in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856 (a)(2). Principally at issue is whether the government bears the burden of proving at sentencing that a convicted narcotics laboratory operator actually participated in the underlying drug offense under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.8. Leasure contends that imposing that burden upon the defendant is constitutionally defective as violative of his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process, his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, and finally, his rights under the Grand Jury clause of the Fifth Amendment because participation, a fact that increases his sentence, was not charged in the indictment. Leasure also asserts (i) the invalidity of the search warrant for his premises as unsupported by probable cause; (ii) ineffective assistance of counsel in the pre-trial proceedings; (iii) insufficiency of the evidence presented at trial; (iv) error by the district court in failing to employ a heightened standard of proof to determine whether he participated in the underlying offense; and (v) error in the district court’s drug quantity…

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.