Smalls v. United States

Background

Jamal Smalls filed a self-represented motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The opinion's opening sentence refers to “2 U.S.C. § 2255,” but the governing statute is otherwise identified as 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

A jury convicted Smalls after a 12-day trial of three offenses: conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute specified amounts of crack cocaine, heroin, and cocaine; using, carrying, possessing, and discharging firearms in connection with a drug-trafficking conspiracy; and murdering Doneil White in connection with that conspiracy. The court sentenced him to 55 years in prison: 25 years on the drug-conspiracy count, 25 years on the firearm count, and 5 years on the murder count, all consecutive. The Second Circuit upheld the conviction and sentence on appeal.

Smalls’s Arguments

Smalls argued that the First Step Act of 2018 eliminated the increased mandatory minimums for multiple firearm convictions and should apply to his sentence. The court held that the relevant change to the firearm “stacking” rule was not retroactive. It also concluded that his sentence had been correctly calculated under the law in effect when he was convicted. The court noted that Smalls received the benefit of treating the murder count as his first firearm offense and the firearm count as his second.

Smalls also relied on United States v. Davis, in which the Supreme Court held that the residual clause in the definition of a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3) was unconstitutionally vague. The court held that Davis did not affect Smalls’s convictions because his firearm convictions were based on a drug-trafficking crime, not on a crime-of-violence theory.

In a reply brief, Smalls argued that the government had not proved that he possessed a firearm or knew he belonged to a category of people barred from possessing firearms. The court held that this argument was procedurally barred because he had not raised it on direct appeal or within the one-year deadline for a § 2255 motion. The court also rejected the argument on the merits, finding that trial evidence supported the firearm conviction and that the knowledge requirement recognized in Rehaif v. United States did not apply because Smalls was convicted for what he did, rather than for belonging to a prohibited category.

Smalls argued that the government had not proved that he actually possessed drugs. The court held that this claim was also procedurally barred because it was not raised on direct appeal or within the applicable one-year period. The court alternatively rejected the claim on the merits, explaining that a drug-trafficking conspiracy requires proof of an agreement to produce, sell, or deliver drugs, not proof of the defendant’s actual possession. The court found that trial testimony supported the charged drug quantities.

Smalls further argued that his 55-year sentence was disproportionate and violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The court rejected that argument, noting that the sentence was below the applicable guideline range of life imprisonment plus 35 years and reflected the murder, the serious injury to another person, and Smalls’s criminal history, including a prior manslaughter conviction and 10-year sentence.

Finally, Smalls argued that the First Step Act changed the requirements and penalties for enhanced mandatory minimums under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). The court held that this argument did not apply because the government had not filed a prior felony information, so Smalls was not sentenced under an enhanced mandatory minimum. The court also noted that the relevant change was not retroactive.

Ruling and Disposition

The court denied Smalls’s motion in its entirety. It did not issue a certificate of appealability because Smalls had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, directed the clerk to close the civil and criminal cases, and terminated all pending motions.