Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 11-4985
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
(1:10-cr-00466-MBS-3)
Submitted:
August 8, 2012
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
A federal jury convicted Lamatavous Regtez Collins of
conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribute
cocaine and marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846 (2006).
The
district
court
sentenced
Collins
to
360
months
of
his
motion
to
suppress
statements
he
made
to
the
his
violation
of
that
agreement,
where
the
Government
review
factual
findings
conclusions de novo.
for
clear
error,
and
its
legal
When
Cir. 2005).
In Brady, the Supreme Court announced that the Due
Process
Clause
requires
the
government
2
to
disclose
evidence
In order to establish a
he
Greene,
material
was
527
if
prejudiced
by
U.S.
263,
the
defendant
that
281-82
suppression.
(1999).
can
Favorable
demonstrate
that
Strickler
v.
evidence
is
there
is
Caro,
conclude that the district court did not err in concluding that
the challenged evidence was not favorable to Collins as it was
not exculpatory or impeaching.
Collins
next
argues
that
there
was
insufficient
evidence.
Smith,
451
F.3d
at
216
(citations
omitted).
could
accept
as
adequate
and
sufficient
to
support
(internal
quotation
marks
and
citation
omitted).
presented.
quotation
marks
Beidler,
and
110
citation
F.3d
at
1067
omitted).
(internal
Reversal
for
persons,
(3) that
(2)
Collins
conspiracy.
this
Collins
knowingly
knew
and
of
the
agreement,
voluntarily
joined
and
the
that
showing
through
direct
evidence.
In
fact,
Id. at 858.
that
there
substantial
4
evidence
to
support
the
calculating
calculating
applying
the
an
reviewing
the
advisory
amount
of
enhancement
the
Guidelines
drugs
for
district
range
attributable
possession
courts
of
by
to
incorrectly
Collins
firearm.
calculations
under
and
In
the
and
its
factual
findings
for
clear
error.
United
States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 626 (4th Cir. 2010) (internal
quotation
marks
and
citation
omitted).
We
will
find
clear
error only if, on the entire evidence, we are left with the
definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
Id. at 631 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
At sentencing, the Government need only establish the
amount of drugs involved in an offense by a preponderance of the
evidence.
(4th Cir. 2008); United States v. Cook, 76 F.3d 596, 604 (4th
Cir. 1996).
drugs seized does not reflect the scale of the offense, the
court
shall
substance.
approximate
the
quantity
of
the
controlled
Cir.
1994).
In
addition,
district
court
may
consider
been
Watts v.
proven
afford
United
the
by
preponderance
States,
district
519
U.S.
court
of
148,
broad
the
156
evidence.
(1997).
discretion
See
We
as
to
will
what
Cook, 76
was
possessed.
See
U.S.
Sentencing
Guidelines
Manual
(USSG) 2D1.1(b).
that
should
the
enhancement
be
applied
if
the
weapon
was
with
the
reviewing
offense.
the
USSG
record
and
2D1.1(b)
carefully
cmt.
n.3(A).
considering
the
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED