US v. Ollivierre
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DESMOND OLLIVIERRE, a/k/a James Franklin Bridges, Defendant - Appellant.
On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States. (S. Ct. No. 06-6637)
April 21, 2008
May 16, 2008
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John H. Hare, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Reginald I. Lloyd, United States Attorney, Kevin F. McDonald, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Desmond Ollivierre was convicted by a jury in 2003 of one count of possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine and sentenced to 225 months imprisonment. This court affirmed
Ollivierre's conviction and sentence. United States v. Ollivierre, 378 F.3d 412 (4th Cir. 2004). The Supreme Court granted
Ollivierre's petition for writ of certiorari, vacated this court's judgment and remanded for further consideration in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). States, 543 U.S. 1112 (2005). resentencing. See Ollivierre v. United
We, in turn, remanded the case for
United States v. Ollivierre, No. 03-4802 (4th Cir.
Nov. 22, 2005) (unpublished). On remand, the district court resentenced Ollivierre to 210 months imprisonment. He appealed, challenging the district
court's refusal to depart from the advisory guidelines range which took into account the 100:1 crack to powder cocaine ratio. This
court affirmed on the reasoning of United States v. Eura, 440 F.3d 625 (4th Cir. 2006) (holding that 100:1 ratio cannot be the basis of a variance), vacated, 128 S. Ct. 853 (2008). Ollivierre again
filed a petition for writ of certiorari and, again, the Supreme Court vacated his sentence and remanded to this court for further consideration in light of Kimbrough v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 558, 564 (2007) (holding that a sentencing judge is free to consider the disparity between the Guidelines' treatment of crack
- 2 -
particular case, a within-Guidelines sentence is `greater than necessary' to serve the objectives of sentencing." U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2000)). Upon review of the record, we conclude that resentencing is warranted. remand to the Therefore, we vacate Ollivierre's sentence and district court for resentencing in light of (citing 18
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
- 3 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?