USA v. Thaddeus Patterson

Filing 920100120

Download PDF
Case: 09-60317 Document: 00511007408 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/19/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 09-60317 Summary Calendar January 19, 2010 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. THADDEUS LORENZO PATTERSON, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi USDC No. 1:05-CR-124-1 Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Thaddeus Lorenzo Patterson appeals from his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine hydrochloride (powder cocaine). Because Patterson's offense involved 501.5 grams of powder cocaine, he was subject to the 60-month mandatory minimum sentence pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)(B)(ii). He was sentenced to 60 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release. Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . R. 47.5.4. * Case: 09-60317 Document: 00511007408 Page: 2 No. 09-60317 Date Filed: 01/19/2010 On appeal, Patterson argues that imposition of the statutory minimum sentence violated his Eighth Amendment guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment and his Fifth Amendment right to due process. As he has failed to show that his sentence is grossly disproportionate to the severity of his crime, his Eighth Amendment claim fails. See United States v. Gonzales, 121 F.3d 928, 942 (5th Cir. 1997). Moreover, despite Patterson's arguments to the contrary, the statutory minimum sentence was not based upon an arbitrary distinction that resulted in a violation of his due process rights. See United States v. RojasMartinez, 968 F.2d 415, 420 (5th Cir. 1992). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2

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?