Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Cleveland Laquincy GRIFFIN, a/k/a Q, Defendant - Appellant.
Cleveland Laquincy Griffin appeals the district court's order denying relief on Griffin's motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222. Although the district court agreed that Griffin's conviction for possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), was a covered offense under § 404(a) of the First Step Act, the district court explained that the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 did not change Griffin's career offender Sentencing Guidelines range. The district court, which did not have the benefit of our recent decision in United States v. Chambers, 956 F.3d 667 (4th Cir. 2020), declined to consider Griffin's argument for a lower sentence based on his postsentencing efforts at rehabilitation and his argument that, under current sentencing law, he is no longer a career offender.
We held in Chambers that that “the First Step Act does not constrain [district] courts from recognizing Guidelines errors” and that “any Guidelines error deemed retroactive ․ must be corrected in a First Step Act resentencing” 956 F.3d at 668. A district court conducting a resentencing under § 404 of the First Step Act also has the discretion to vary from the defendant's Guidelines range to reflect postsentencing conduct. Id. at 674. We therefore vacate the district court's order and remand to allow the court to address Griffin's arguments on the merits. We express no opinion on the merits of Griffin's First Step Act motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
PER CURIAM:
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 19-7182
Decided: September 15, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)