United States v. Cabell , 118 F. App'x 725 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-4622
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    SANDRA KAY CABELL,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Huntington.  Robert C. Chambers,
    District Judge. (CR-04-31)
    Submitted:   November 30, 2004         Decided:     December 22, 2004
    Before WILLIAMS and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    John G. Hackney, Jr., Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellant.
    Kasey Warner, United States Attorney, Stephanie L. Haines,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Sandra Kay Cabell pled guilty to aiding and abetting bank
    robbery, 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 2113
    , 2 (2000), and was sentenced to a term
    of thirty-seven months imprisonment.             She contends on appeal that
    the district court clearly erred in denying her an adjustment
    pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.2 (2003) for
    having a minor role in the robbery.           We affirm.
    Cabell drove Troy Handley to the Postal Credit Union in
    Huntington, West Virginia, on February 12, 2003, and parked in an
    alley behind the bank.         When Handley emerged from the bank with
    $7800, Cabell drove him away.         A bank employee enlisted the help of
    a passing driver and they tried to follow Cabell’s car, but she
    successfully eluded them and took Handley to her home.                Handley
    immediately used some of the stolen money to obtain crack and was
    smoking crack with Cabell when the police arrived.             At the guilty
    plea hearing, Cabell stated that, when she drove Handley to the
    bank,   she    knew   he   intended   to   rob   the   bank.   She   said   she
    deliberately parked where her car would not be visible.              She said
    Handley came out of the bank with money in “stacks of hundreds” and
    that she drove away, knowing that she was helping him escape from
    the scene of the robbery.
    A defendant’s role in the offense is a factual question
    reviewed for clear error.        United States v. Sayles, 
    296 F.3d 219
    ,
    224 (4th Cir. 2002).       It is the defendant’s burden to show that she
    - 2 -
    is entitled to a minor role adjustment. United States v. Akinkoye,
    
    185 F.3d 192
    , 202 (4th Cir. 1999).          The district court should
    examine    the   defendant’s   conduct    relative   to    that   of   other
    defendants and to the elements of the offense of conviction.            
    Id.
    The critical inquiry is whether the defendant’s conduct is material
    or essential to the commission of the offense.            
    Id.
    Cabell argues that she was less culpable than Handley
    because she took no part in the planning or execution of the
    robbery.     She also contends that the adjustment was warranted
    because she was addicted to cocaine and she had little time to
    decide to become involved.       However, a defendant who knowingly
    assists another by driving him to and from the scene of the crime
    has more than a minor role.      United States v. Terry, 
    86 F.3d 353
    ,
    358 (4th Cir. 1996) (defendant who was driver of car from which co-
    defendant shot at driver of passing vehicle did not have minor role
    because he followed car so co-defendant could keep shooting).
    Cabell’s assistance facilitated Handley’s robbery of the bank.            We
    conclude that the district court did not clearly err in denying her
    the minor role adjustment.
    We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district
    court.    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    - 3 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-4622

Citation Numbers: 118 F. App'x 725

Judges: Williams, Gregory, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/22/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024