Whether a defendant's sentence may be based on relevant conduct of codefendants that occurred before the defendant joined the criminal activity

The other side of the split

Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.

• On the other side · 7th Cir.United States v. Centraccio977 F.2d 1061
• On the other side · 7th Cir.United States v. Edwards945 F.2d 1387
• On the other side · 2d Cir.United States v. Miranda-Ortiz926 F.2d 172
• On the other side · 10th Cir.United States v. Matthews942 F.2d 779
• On the other side · 4th Cir.United States v. Willard909 F.2d 780

  “Willard, 909 F.2d 780 (4th Cir.1990), all held that a defendant's sentence could reflect the prior relevant conduct of other persons who carried out their criminal activity prior to the time that the defendant joined the enterprise.” — United States v. Kenneth A. Selby (93-1424), Thomas C. Dix (93-1451), Mark C. Shinaberry (93-1455), acknowledging the split

• Joined by · 5th Cir.United States v. Carreon11 F.3d 1225

  “The new commentary, proposed to be in accord with the rule from Carreon, provides: 6 A defendant's relevant conduct does not include the conduct of members of a conspiracy prior to the defendant's joining the conspiracy, even if the defendant knows of that conduct (e.g., in the case of a defendant who joins an ongoing drug distribution conspiracy knowing that it had been selling two kilograms of cocaine per week, the cocaine sold prior to the defendant's joining the conspiracy is not included as relevant conduct in determining the defendant's offense level).” — United States v. Kenneth A. Selby (93-1424), Thomas C. Dix (93-1451), Mark C. Shinaberry (93-1455), acknowledging the split

• Joined by · 9th Cir.United States v. Petty992 F.2d 887
• Joined by · 1st Cir.United States v. O'Campo973 F.2d 1015

What the split turns on

Doctrines & tests:

relevant conduct