UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4147
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
EDWARD LEE GREGORY, a/k/a Eddie Lee Gregory, a/k/a Eddie
Gregory,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (3:10-cr-01030-JFA-1)
Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 1, 2012
Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Louis H. Lang, CALLISON TIGHE & ROBINSON, LLC, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellant. William N. Nettles, United States
Attorney, Jeffrey Mikell Johnson, Robert F. Daley, Jr., William
K. Witherspoon, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Edward Lee Gregory pled guilty to possession of
firearms in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2),
924(e) (West 2000 & Supp. 2011). The district court granted the
Government’s motion for a downward departure based on Gregory’s
substantial assistance, and sentenced Gregory to 130 months, the
bottom of the Guidelines range. On appeal, Gregory contends
that the district court erred by applying a four-level
enhancement for use of a firearm in connection with another
felony, USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6), * and abused its discretion by denying
Gregory’s request for a sentence below the mandatory minimum
based on factors in addition to his substantial assistance to
the Government. We affirm.
The Sentencing Guidelines provide for a four-level
enhancement to a defendant’s advisory Guidelines range if the
defendant “used or possessed any firearm or ammunition in
connection with another felony offense.” USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B).
Trading a firearm for drugs constitutes “use” of a firearm “in
relation to” a drug trafficking offense. Smith v. United
States, 508 U.S. 223, 227 (1993); United States v. Garnett, 243
F.3d 824, 829 (4th Cir. 2001). Here, Gregory facilitated the
sale of firearms from Joseph Patterson to John Bennett. Gregory
*
U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(b)(6) (2011).
2
took possession of the firearms and delivered them to Bennett in
exchange for $3,600 cash, a pound of marijuana, and some pills.
Gregory gave the money and the marijuana to Patterson, who gave
Gregory $200 and a quarter pound of marijuana. Because Gregory
exchanged the firearms for money and drugs, the district court
properly applied the enhancement, finding that the use of the
firearm was in relation to the felony offense of possession with
intent to distribute marijuana.
Gregory was correctly determined to be an Armed Career
Criminal, subject to the mandatory minimum 180-month sentence.
18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2006). The Government moved for a downward
departure based on Gregory’s substantial assistance, and the
court granted a four-level departure, making Gregory’s advisory
Guidelines range 130 to 162 months.
Gregory requested a sentence below this Guidelines
range based on the fact that, between the time of the offense,
October 2005, and the time he was indicted in October 2010,
Gregory stopped using drugs, quit his criminal lifestyle, and
maintained lawful employment. He argues that his sentence is
unreasonable because the district court failed to give him any
credit for his extraordinary post-offense, pre-indictment self-
rehabilitation.
District courts have “[l]imited authority to impose a
sentence below a statutory minimum.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e)
3
(2006). Such authority is granted when the Government makes a
motion for a reduced sentence based on the “defendant’s
substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of
another person who has committed an offense.” Id. However,
“the extent of a § 3553(e) departure is based solely on the
defendant’s substantial assistance and other factors related to
that assistance.” United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d 226, 234 n.2
(4th Cir. 2009); see United States v. A.B., 529 F.3d 1275, 1285
(10th Cir. 2008) (holding that district court lacks authority to
depart further below statutory minimum after granting departure
based on substantial assistance).
The district court properly exercised its authority to
depart below the statutory mandatory minimum based on the
Government’s motion. We conclude that the district court did
not abuse its discretion in considering the serious and
prolonged nature of Gregory’s criminal history, as well as his
extraordinary self-rehabilitation and other sentencing factors,
and imposing a 130-month sentence—the bottom of the advisory
Guidelines range. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 46,
51 (2007) (providing standard of review); United States v.
Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007) (applying appellate
presumption of reasonableness to within-Guidelines sentence).
Accordingly, we affirm Gregory’s sentence. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
4
adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
5