Background
Joshua York appealed his twenty-seven-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. He argued that the district court erred in classifying his prior Georgia methamphetamine convictions as controlled substance offenses under the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
The court’s reasoning
The court granted the government’s motion for summary affirmance, finding the appeal frivolous and foreclosed by precedent in United States v. Kennedy. The court explained that under the Sentencing Guidelines, a controlled substance is defined by state law at the time of the conviction. Since methamphetamine was regulated by Georgia law when York was convicted, the prior offenses qualified as controlled substance offenses. The court noted that any mismatch between state and federal definitions does not affect the career offender enhancement.
A drug regulated by state law is a controlled substance for state predicate offenses, even if federal law does not regulate that drug.
United States v. Kennedy, 146 F.4th 1054, 1071 (11th Cir. 2025)
What it means going forward
This ruling reinforces that state drug laws control the definition of controlled substance offenses for federal sentencing enhancements, closing arguments based on federal-state definitional mismatches for prior state convictions.