Background
David Gerome Kennedy appealed his sentence of one hundred eighty months imprisonment for conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute more than five hundred grams of cocaine and methamphetamine. Officers investigated Kennedy starting in March two thousand twenty-one after receiving information from a confidential source. They conducted controlled buys of cocaine at a residence in Milton, Florida, and obtained a wiretap that revealed Kennedy used the address to arrange drug sales while sleeping at a residence in Pace, Florida. Search warrants executed at both addresses seized large quantities of drugs, including cocaine, methamphetamine, and marijuana, along with three firearms and ammunition. A grand jury indicted Kennedy on two counts, and he pleaded guilty. The presentence report calculated an offense level of forty, applying enhancements for a firearm and for maintaining a premises for drug distribution. The district court sentenced Kennedy to one hundred eighty months followed by five years of supervised release.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the sentencing objections for plain error. Kennedy argued that the government failed to prove he possessed a firearm in relation to illegal drug activity and that the premises was not primarily used for drug distribution. The court noted that under United States Sentencing Guidelines section two point one point one subsection b one, the government must prove a firearm was present at the site of the charged conduct. Evidence of proximity between the firearm and drugs is sufficient to establish a connection. Firearms were found at the Milton residence where Kennedy conducted his drug business, establishing a rebuttable presumption that the enhancement applied. Kennedy failed to prove that the connection was clearly improbable. Regarding the premises enhancement, the court held that a premises need not be solely used for drug distribution but must be one of its primary uses. Evidence showed Kennedy engaged in extensive drug activity at the Milton residence, including selling drugs multiple times over several years. Therefore, the district court did not plainly err in applying the enhancement.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the Eleventh Circuit’s standard that proximity between firearms and drugs is sufficient to trigger sentencing enhancements, and that drug activity need not be the sole use of a residence to qualify for a premises enhancement.