US v. Johnnie Butler

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Wright's motion for leave to file a pro se brief [998534173-2]; denying Butler's motion for summary reversal [998389731-2]. Originating case number: 1:08-cr-00381-BEL-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998592030].. [10-4499, 10-4566]

Appeal: 10-4499

Document: 63

Date Filed: 05/18/2011

Page: 1 of 5

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-4499

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JOHNNIE BUTLER,
Defendant – Appellant.

No. 10-4566

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
CALVIN WRIGHT, a/k/a Turkey,
Defendant – Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, District Judge.
(1:08-cr-00381-BEL-1; 1:08-cr-00381-BEL-2)

Submitted:

May 2, 2011

Decided:

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

May 18, 2011

Appeal: 10-4499

Document: 63

Date Filed: 05/18/2011

Page: 2 of 5

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas J. Saunders, Baltimore, Maryland; James Wyda, Federal
Defender,
Meghan
S.
Skelton,
Staff
Attorney,
Greenbelt,
Maryland, for Appellants.
Rod J. Rosenstein, United States
Attorney, Christine Celeste, Special Assistant United States
Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 10-4499

Document: 63

Date Filed: 05/18/2011

Page: 3 of 5

PER CURIAM:
Johnnie

Butler

and

Calvin

convictions following a jury trial.

Wright

appeal

their

Both men were convicted of

conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute
controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2006)
(Count

One);

possession

drug-trafficking

crime,

§ 924(c)(1)(A)(i)

(2006)

of

a

firearm

in

in

violation

furtherance

(Count

Three);

and

of

18

of

a

U.S.C.

possession

of

a

firearm after a felony conviction, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)

(2006)

(Count

Four).

Additionally,

Wright

was

convicted of possession of heroin, with intent to distribute, in
violation
Five).

of
The

21

U.S.C.

court

§ 841(a)(1),

sentenced

Butler

Wright to 420 months’ imprisonment.

(b)(1)(C)
to

life

(2006)

(Count

imprisonment

and

We affirm.

Wright argues that the evidence was not sufficient to
support the jury’s finding that he possessed the heroin found in
his apartment.

This court reviews a sufficiency-of-the-evidence

challenge by determining whether, viewing the evidence in the
light most favorable to the Government, any rational trier of
fact could find the essential elements of the crime beyond a
reasonable doubt.

United States v. Collins, 412 F.3d 515, 519

(4th Cir. 2005).

Our review of the evidence convinces us that

the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to establish that
Wright possessed the heroin and intended to distribute it.
3

Appeal: 10-4499

Document: 63

Date Filed: 05/18/2011

Page: 4 of 5

Wright and Butler argue that the district court erred
in denying their motion for a mistrial after a court security
officer made comments to the jury regarding the origin of a
firearm.

“[D]enial of a defendant’s motion for a mistrial is

within the sound discretion of the district court and will be
disturbed only under the most extraordinary of circumstances.”
United States v. Dorlouis, 107 F.3d 248, 257 (4th Cir. 1997).
Given the brief nature of the comments at issue here and the
curative

instruction

given

district

court

not

did

by

the

abuse

court,

its

we

find

discretion

that

in

the

denying

Appellants’ motion for a mistrial.
Butler argues that because the jury acquitted him of
possession

and

discharge

of

a

firearm,

causing

the

death

of

Fernando Rodriguez, in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime,
the

court

erred

by

taking

Butler’s sentencing.

that

conduct

into

account

during

However, conduct for which a defendant has

been acquitted may nonetheless be considered by the district
court

in

determining

established

by

a

a

sentence,

preponderance

so

long

as

the

of

the

evidence.

States v. Young, 609 F.3d 348, 357 (4th Cir. 2010).

conduct

is

United
Here, the

Government provided sufficient evidence upon which the district
court could base its finding that Butler had caused Rodriguez’s
death by a preponderance of the evidence, even if such evidence
was not sufficient to establish the offense charged beyond a
4

Appeal: 10-4499

Document: 63

Date Filed: 05/18/2011

reasonable doubt.

Page: 5 of 5

Accordingly, the court did not err in taking

such conduct into account during sentencing.
Finally, Butler argues that the district court erred
in

finding

that

Butler

was

an

organizer

or

leader

of

the

criminal activity, pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§ 3B1.1, and accordingly applying a sentencing enhancement.
review this determination for clear error.
Slade,

631

F.3d

185,

188

(4th

Cir.

We

See United States v.

2011);

United

Kellam, 568 F.3d 125, 147-48 (4th Cir. 2009).

States

v.

We find that the

district court did not clearly err because the enhancement is
supported by evidence in the record.
We therefore affirm the convictions and sentences of
Butler and Wright.

We deny Wright’s motion to file a pro se

supplemental

and

reversal.
legal
before

brief

Butler’s

motion

for

summary

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions
the

deny

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
AFFIRMED

5