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. Clyde Allen LINCOLN Defendant - Appellant
[Unpublished]
Clyde Lincoln pled guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine near a protected location in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 860(a). The district court 1 determined Lincoln was a career offender and sentenced him to 188 months of imprisonment and 8 years of supervised release, a sentence at the lowest end of the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual’s (“Guidelines”) range of 188 to 235 months. Absent the career-offender classification, the recommended Guidelines range would have been 151 to 188 months. On appeal, Lincoln challenges the district court’s career-offender determination. We review that determination de novo. United States v. Quigley, 943 F.3d 390, 393 (8th Cir. 2019).
Lincoln qualifies as a career offender if he (1) “was at least eighteen years old at the time [he] committed the instant offense of conviction; (2) the instant offense of conviction is a felony that is ․ a controlled substance offense; and (3) [he] has at least two prior felony convictions of ․ a controlled substance offense.” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a). Citing two prior drug convictions under Iowa Code section 124.401(1)(c)(6), the district court classified Lincoln as a career offender. Lincoln argues these prior convictions are not proper career-offender predicates because “Iowa’s aiding and abetting statute is broader than the generic definition of aiding and abetting.” Recognizing that this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Boleyn, Lincoln argues that case was wrongly decided and should be overruled. 929 F.3d 932, 938–40 (8th Cir. 2019). But because “one panel is bound by the decision of a prior panel,” Lincoln seeks relief which we cannot grant. United States v. Boykin, 794 F.3d 939, 948 (8th Cir. 2015) (quoting Owsley v. Luebbers, 281 F.3d 687, 690 (8th Cir. 2002)). We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Honorable Leonard T. Strand, Chief United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
PER CURIAM.
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. 19-2219
Decided: May 14, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eighth 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)