11th Cir.

United States v. Coleman

May 4, 2026 ·25-10693 ·Per Curiam · By James Taylor

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a ninety-two-month prison sentence for possession of an unregistered machinegun conversion device. The court rejected arguments that a prior Florida cocaine conviction did not qualify as a controlled substance offense and that the district court abused its discretion in denying a downward variance.

Background

Markell Coleman appealed his sentence of ninety-two months’ imprisonment for possession of an unregistered machinegun conversion device. He challenged the district court’s determination that his 2016 Florida conviction for sale of cocaine qualified him as a career offender and argued the court abused its discretion by declining a downward variance.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the career-offender enhancement de novo. Under United States v. Dubois, a state conviction qualifies as a controlled substance offense if the state law prohibited the substance at the time of the defendant’s conviction, regardless of subsequent federal schedule changes. The court found Florida law defined cocaine as a controlled substance in 2016, sustaining the enhancement. Regarding substantive reasonableness, the court applied an abuse-of-discretion standard. It found the district court permissibly considered the dangerousness of the offense, Coleman’s criminal history, and the need to protect the public. The sentence was on the low end of the guideline range, and Coleman failed to show a clear error of judgment.

What it means going forward

The ruling reinforces that state drug schedules control the definition of controlled substance offenses for career offender enhancements at the time of the prior conviction, even if federal schedules change later. It also confirms that sentences on the low end of the guideline range are difficult to overturn on substantive reasonableness grounds.