Summary
This Third Circuit Court of Appeals opinion addresses whether a defendant convicted of opioid distribution and healthcare fraud is eligible for a retroactive sentencing guideline reduction under U.S.S.G. § 4C1.1 for "zero-point offenders." The court interprets the disqualifying conditions in subsection (a)(10), concluding that the conjunction "and" operates disjunctively based on the Sentencing Guidelines' structure and the canon against surplusage. Consequently, the defendant's receipt of an aggravating role adjustment renders him ineligible for the reduction, and the district court's denial of his motion for sentence reduction is affirmed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether § 4C1.1’s “and” in subsection (a)(10) operates disjunctively, making any defendant who received an aggravating role adjustment ineligible for the offense‑level reduction.
Holdings
- § 4C1.1(a)(10) operates disjunctively; a defendant who received an aggravating role adjustment is ineligible for the offense‑level reduction, regardless of whether he was engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise.
Key quotations
“We adopt a similar approach. As a first step, we note that both conjunctive and disjunctive readings of § 4C1.1(a)(10) are “grammatically permissible” in the abstract.” (at 5)
“The canon against surplusage counsels against adopting interpretations that render a statute “superfluous, void, or insignificant.”” (at 5)
Factual background
Michael Milchin, a leader of a conspiracy to illegally distribute opioids, pleaded guilty to healthcare fraud, conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud, conspiracy to distribute oxycodone, and possession with intent to distribute. He was sentenced in 2018 to 168 months imprisonment and three years supervised release. After the Sentencing Guidelines amendment effective November 1, 2023, Milchin sought a reduction based on § 4C1.1, claiming he was a zero‑point offender.
Procedural history
Milchin pleaded guilty in 2018 and was sentenced to 168 months. He later sought a retroactive application of the new offense‑level reduction under USSG § 4C1.1 for zero‑point offenders. The district court denied his motion, finding him ineligible, and the decision was appealed to this circuit.