Stevens v. United States

Background

Terrell Stevens pleaded guilty in 2016 to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine and heroin, and to using, carrying, or possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime. The court imposed a 148-month prison sentence in 2017. The opinion addresses four motions: two requests under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence, and two requests under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) and (B) to reduce the sentence. The opinion also identifies a related civil docket, 21-CV-6152.

Section 2255 Motions

The court had previously treated Stevens’s March 19, 2021 submission as his first motion under § 2255, after warning him about the consequences and giving him an opportunity to withdraw it. The court had also directed him to explain why the motion should not be denied as untimely and why some claims were not procedurally barred because he had not raised them on direct appeal. Stevens did not establish extraordinary circumstances that prevented timely filing. The court therefore denied the first § 2255 motion as time-barred.

The court also denied Stevens’s September 15, 2022 § 2255 motion. It held that denial of the first motion as time-barred counted as an adjudication for purposes of the rules governing second or successive § 2255 motions. Stevens therefore needed authorization from the Second Circuit before filing another such motion in the district court. The court also noted that appointed counsel had assisted Stevens at different stages, while Stevens had made some submissions without counsel.

Sentence-Reduction Motion Under Section 3582(c)(1)(B)

Stevens argued that Section 404 of the First Step Act allowed a reduction based on changes to crack-cocaine penalties. The court explained that the drug-trafficking offense qualified as a covered offense, but held that Stevens had already been sentenced under the reduced penalties created by the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. He therefore was not entitled to another reduction on that ground.

Stevens also argued that the court had incorrectly applied a career-offender enhancement. The court rejected that argument because the sentencing record showed that Stevens had been assigned Criminal History Category IV. Under the Sentencing Guidelines, career offenders receive Category VI, so the court concluded that Stevens had not been sentenced as a career offender. The court denied the motion under § 3582(c)(1)(B).

Sentence-Reduction Motion Under Section 3582(c)(1)(A)

Section 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step Act, permits a sentence reduction when extraordinary and compelling reasons support it, after applicable sentencing factors are considered. The court assumed, without deciding, that Stevens had satisfied the requirement to pursue administrative remedies through the Bureau of Prisons. It held that he had not shown extraordinary and compelling reasons because the crack-cocaine penalty changes he cited had already benefited him and did not apply in the way he claimed to his later offense conduct.

The court further held that the sentencing factors did not support a reduction. It relied on the seriousness of the drug-trafficking organization’s conduct, its use of violence and firearms, the need for deterrence, and the fact that Stevens had already received a below-Guidelines sentence. The court denied the motion under § 3582(c)(1)(A).

Disposition

The court denied Stevens’s two § 2255 motions and denied his motions under §§ 3582(c)(1)(A) and (B). It declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Stevens had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, so Stevens could not proceed without paying the filing fee for such an appeal. Judge Kimba M. Wood directed the clerk to close the four identified motions.