United States v. Bailey, 973 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2020). The court did not err in applying §3B1.1(a)’s four-level adjustment for aggravating role in criminal activity involving five or more participants. The court, “albeit clumsily” articulated, relied on the number of individuals who provided patient referrals (participants), not the number of patients who those individuals referred (victims).
United States v. Bailey, 973 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2020). The court did not err in applying §3C1.1’s two-level adjustment for obstruction. The defendant directed a participant in an illegal kick-back scheme to lie to investigators about the basis for the defendant’s payment to the participant.
United States v. French, 976 F.3d 744 (6th Cir. 2020). A two-level increase for obstruction of justice under §3C1.1 applied where the defendant made social media posts calling his co-defendant a “rat” and accusing him of “snitching for time cuts.” Even though the government did not intend to call the co-defendant as a witness at the sentencing, the posts were made with the intent to keep the co-defendant from cooperating with law enforcement.
United States v. Mukes, 980 F.3d 526 (6th Cir. 2020). The court should not have applied the 2-level enhancement for reckless endangerment during flight at §3C1.2 in a case where the defendant threw a firearm while fleeing from the police. The government did not prove by a preponderance that dropping the weapon presented a risk that the gun would discharge.
United States v. Hill, 982 F.3d 441 (6th Cir. 2020). The only Chapter Three adjustments applicable to career offenders is acceptance of responsibility under §3E1.1. The career offender guideline overrides other Chapter Three adjustments such as mitigating role.