Case: 16-10974 Date Filed: 02/03/2017 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-10974
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cr-20529-JAL-8
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RHAKEIM THOMAS,
a.k.a. King,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(February 3, 2017)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 16-10974 Date Filed: 02/03/2017 Page: 2 of 3
Rhakeim Thomas appeals his sentence of 57 months of imprisonment for
conspiring to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance. 21 U.S.C.
§§ 841(a)(1), 846. Thomas argues that the district court “failed to make specific,
individualized findings” explaining its decision to hold him accountable for all the
drugs sold during his participation in the conspiracy. We affirm.
The district court did not clearly err. Thomas admitted in his factual proffer
that he “willingly joined [a] plan” to “distribut[e] illegal narcotics” and that he
“managed [two] trap houses [from which he] sold narcotics” and “regularly
updated [the leaders of the conspiracy] regarding the status of the trap houses, and
requested resupplies when the supply of narcotics was running low.” Thomas also
admitted that his coconspirators sold cocaine base, powder cocaine, Ethylone,
Alprazolam, and marijuana and that “law enforcement recovered more than 83
grams of crack cocaine and more than 160 grams of powder cocaine.” These
admissions provided specific and reliable evidence on which the district court
based its finding that “[t]he scope of [Thomas’s] agreement was to sell illegal
narcotics from the trap houses” for “the time period” he participated in the
conspiracy. See United States v. Lawrence, 47 F.3d 1559, 1566 (11th Cir. 1995).
The district court was entitled to, in its words, hold Thomas “accountable for his
sales and the sales of other persons [of the various types of narcotics] . . . during
the time period for which he sold drugs at the trap house” because “the conduct of
2
Case: 16-10974 Date Filed: 02/03/2017 Page: 3 of 3
each of those persons was within the scope of the jointly undertaken criminal
activity,” was made “in furtherance of that criminal activity[,] and was reasonably
foreseeable in connection with that criminal activity.” See United States
Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) (Nov. 2015); United States v.
Ismond, 993 F.2d 1498, 1499 (11th Cir. 1993) (“For sentencing purposes a
member of a drug conspiracy is liable for his own acts and the acts of others in
furtherance of the activity that the defendant agreed to undertake and that are
reasonably foreseeable in connection with that activity.”). And Thomas agreed that
the government made a “reasonable” estimate that, during his participation, the
conspiracy sold 120 grams of cocaine base and 120 grams of powder cocaine.
Ample evidence supported the amount of drugs attributed to Thomas.
We AFFIRM Thomas’s sentence.
3