Summary
This Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion affirms the district court's denial of defendant David Milam's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas and his 300-month sentence. The court held that the government's inadvertent production of an incomplete search warrant affidavit was not material to Milam's decision to plead guilty, particularly given his expressed desire to avoid further prosecution and the benefits secured through his plea agreements. Furthermore, the court found no reversible error in denying credit for acceptance of responsibility due to Milam's post-indictment criminal conduct, and concluded his below-Guidelines sentence was substantively reasonable given his extensive criminal history and ongoing dangerous behavior.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Milam established a fair and just reason under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(d)(2)(B) to withdraw his first two guilty pleas because the government had produced an incomplete copy of the search warrant and supporting affidavit.
- Whether the district court improperly denied Milam credit for acceptance of responsibility after the government had agreed to the reduction in the plea agreement and had not timely objected to the presentence report.
- Whether Milam's 300-month downward-variant sentence was substantively unreasonable.
Holdings
- A defendant who entered knowing and voluntary guilty pleas after a proper Rule 11 colloquy does not establish a fair and just reason for withdrawal merely because the government inadvertently produced an incomplete search warrant and affidavit, when the complete materials would not have materially changed the defendant's decision to plead guilty.
- The district court did not commit reversible error by denying an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction despite the government's earlier agreement and failure to object timely to the presentence report, because the district court had an independent obligation to determine eligibility and Milam's post-plea drug distribution and assaultive conduct provided good reason to deny the reduction.
- A 300-month sentence, imposed 60 months below the applicable advisory Guidelines range, was not substantively unreasonable.
Key quotations
“a defendant in Milam’s circumstances must show “a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.”” (10)
“In this case, we conclude that Milam’s 300-month sentence, which was 60 months below the bottom of the Guidelines range, was not longer than necessary to effectuate the purposes of sentencing.” (18)
Factual background
Law-enforcement officers investigating Milam, the leader of the Aryan Kings, stopped vehicles leaving his residence and recovered drugs, drug paraphernalia, cash, and packaging materials. Officers then searched his residence pursuant to a warrant and recovered firearms, ammunition, drugs, and drug-trafficking equipment. The government inadvertently produced a copy of the warrant and supporting affidavit that omitted every other page, but the complete affidavit contained stronger evidence of probable cause. After pleading guilty, Milam distributed drugs to inmates while detained and assaulted two sheriff's deputies while awaiting sentencing.
Procedural history
Milam pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and to drug-distribution offenses, and later pleaded guilty to assaulting persons assisting federal officers. After discovering that the government had inadvertently produced an incomplete copy of a search warrant and affidavit, he moved to withdraw the first two pleas. The district court denied that motion, denied an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction based on Milam's post-plea conduct, and imposed a 300-month downward-variant sentence. The Fourth Circuit affirmed.