United States v. Reddick

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

March 28, 2002

Case

United States v. Reddick

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

PER CURIAM. Defendants William Foster and Maurice Reddick appeal their sentences on remand after resentencing. They claim that the amount of cocaine attributed to them was not reasonably foreseeable. They also claim that their sentences violate Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). On February 18, 1997, a federal grant jury indicted eight Defendants on offenses related to two separate drug conspiracies and money laundering. After several of the Defendants pleaded guilty, Defendants Foster and Reddick were tried on August 12, 1997. On August 29, 1997, the jury returned its verdicts. It convicted Foster on one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine (Count One) and on one count of possession with intent to distribute marijuana (Count Twelve). The jury also convicted Reddick of two counts of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base (Counts One and Five). On December 16, 1997, Foster was sentenced to 168 months *58 in prison followed by five years of supervised release. On November 25, 1997, Reddick was sentenced to 151 months followed by five years of supervised release. On March 21, 2000, the S…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.