Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Patrick Pellegrini, 929 F.2d 55, 2d Cir. (1991)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    28 views2 pages
    1) Patrick Pellegrini appealed his conviction for distributing cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841, arguing that the district court erred in applying a two-level sentencing enhancement for possession of a dangerous weapon during the offense. 2) The appellate court affirmed, finding that because a loaded shotgun was found in the same apartment where Pellegrini was storing 724 grams of cocaine, the weapon was sufficiently connected to his drug offense for the enhancement to apply. 3) The court noted that relevant conduct for aggregate offenses like drug trafficking includes all acts related to the same course of conduct, and storing drugs is relevant to drug distribution. Therefore, the weapon's presence supported applying

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1991-03-21 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 929 F.2d 55 Docket: 1043

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Patrick Pellegrini appealed his conviction for distributing cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841, arguing that the district court erred in applying a two-level sentencing enhancement for possession of a dangerous weapon during the offense. 2) The appellate court affirmed, finding that because a loaded shotgun was found in the same apartment where Pellegrini was storing 724 grams of cocaine, the weapon was sufficiently connected to his drug offense for the enhancement to apply. 3) The court noted that relevant conduct for aggregate offenses like drug trafficking includes all acts related to the same course of conduct, and storing drugs is relevant to drug distribution. Therefore, the weapon's presence supported applying

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    28 views2 pages

    United States v. Patrick Pellegrini, 929 F.2d 55, 2d Cir. (1991)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Patrick Pellegrini appealed his conviction for distributing cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841, arguing that the district court erred in applying a two-level sentencing enhancement for possession of a dangerous weapon during the offense. 2) The appellate court affirmed, finding that because a loaded shotgun was found in the same apartment where Pellegrini was storing 724 grams of cocaine, the weapon was sufficiently connected to his drug offense for the enhancement to apply. 3) The court noted that relevant conduct for aggregate offenses like drug trafficking includes all acts related to the same course of conduct, and storing drugs is relevant to drug distribution. Therefore, the weapon's presence supported applying

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    929 F.

    2d 55

    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,


    v.
    Patrick PELLEGRINI, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 1043, Docket 90-1233.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    Second Circuit.
    Argued March 1, 1991.
    Decided March 21, 1991.

    David A. Lewis, New York City (Henriette D. Hoffman, Legal Aid Soc.,
    Federal Defender Services Unit, of counsel), for defendant-appellant.
    John Gleeson, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Andrew J. Maloney, U.S. Atty. E.D.N.Y.,
    Matthew E. Fishbein, Laura A. Ward, Asst. U.S. Attys., of counsel), for
    appellee.
    Before OAKES, Chief Judge, CARDAMONE and MAHONEY, Circuit
    Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Patrick Pellegrini appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of New York, Thomas C. Platt, Chief Judge, convicting
    him after a plea of guilty to distributing cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec.
    841. This appeal involves the court's decision to sentence Pellegrini to 78
    months' imprisonment, to be followed by a five year term of supervised release.
    For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

    For purposes of sentencing, Pellegrini's base offense level was calculated as 26,
    based on the seizure of 724 grams of cocaine at Pellegrini's apartment. The
    court added two levels to this number, on the ground that a loaded shotgun had
    been found where the drugs were being stored. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 2D1.1(b)(1)
    ("If a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) was possessed during
    commission of the offense, increase by 2 levels."). Subtracting two levels for
    acceptance of responsibility, the court set the final offense level at 26.

    On appeal, Pellegrini argues that the court erred in making a two-level upward
    adjustment under section 2D1.1(b)(1). His claim is that, although a weapon was
    present in his apartment at the time of his arrest, the evidence does not indicate
    that the weapon was "possessed during commission of the offense," i.e., at the
    time the cocaine was distributed. We believe this argument misconstrues the
    scope of section 2D1.1(b)(1).

    The applicability of a specific offense characteristic, such as section 2D1.1(b)


    (1), depends on whether the conduct at issue is "relevant" to the offense of
    conviction. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 1B1.3. With respect to offenses involving
    "aggregate harms," such as drug offenses, see U.S.S.G. Sec. 3D1.2(d), relevant
    conduct consists of all "acts and omissions that were part of the same course of
    conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction." U.S.S.G. Sec.
    1B1.3(a)(2); see also United States v. Kim, 896 F.2d 678, 682 (2d Cir.1990).
    Here, it is undisputed that a weapon was present at the place the drugs were
    being stored. Because storing drugs is "relevant" to the offense for which
    Pellegrini was convicted, an upward adjustment based on the gun's presence
    was appropriate. See United States v. Schaper, 903 F.2d 891, 896 (2d Cir.1990)
    (concluding that "[t]he presence of a weapon on [the defendant's] premises
    cannot be said to be unrelated to the ongoing narcotics trade" where the
    defendant stored narcotics in his house and used the house to arrange narcotics
    deals). See generally United States v. Franklin, 896 F.2d 1063, 1065-66 (7th
    Cir.1990) (citing cases).

    Pellegrini's reliance on United States v. Rodriguez-Nuez, 919 F.2d 461 (7th


    Cir.1990), is unfounded. In that case, the defendant, who had pleaded guilty to
    possessing cocaine at one location, objected to a two-level upward adjustment
    based on firearms recovered "several miles" away. Id. at 466. In reversing the
    district court's upward adjustment, the Seventh Circuit emphasized the
    remoteness of the narcotics from the firearms, and the absence of evidence that
    the defendant "ever possessed the guns at the same time he was close to the
    seized cocaine." Id. Because, in the present case, the gun was located in the
    same apartment as the cocaine, Rodriguez-Nuez is inapplicable.

    Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

    You might also like