A recent ruling by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the sentence of Corwin Monte Jett, Jr., who was convicted of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. The court addressed two key issues: whether the district court properly denied Jett a reduction in his sentence for accepting responsibility, and whether his sentence was procedurally flawed. The court found that the district court acted correctly on both counts.
Background of the Case
In October 2020, law enforcement received information that Jett was selling methamphetamine he had obtained from Las Vegas. At the time, Jett was on probation for drunk driving offenses. Over the next two months, authorities investigated and gathered evidence that Jett was sending packages of methamphetamine from Las Vegas to locations in Michigan.
In late November 2020, a canine alerted federal investigators to the presence of narcotics in a package Jett had mailed from Las Vegas to his uncle’s home. A search warrant was obtained, and nearly seven pounds of methamphetamine were found inside. Investigators delivered the package, and Jett retrieved it from outside his uncle’s home. When investigators entered the home, they seized the package, drug paraphernalia, and multiple firearms. Simultaneously, a search warrant was executed at Jett’s residence, where more methamphetamine, cocaine, approximately $45,000 in cash, and a hidden, loaded 9mm pistol were found.
During a post-arrest interview, Jett admitted to his involvement in drug trafficking, his possession of the 9mm pistol, and that the packages contained drugs. He was arrested and lodged at the Kalamazoo County Jail for possession of illegal substances and firearms while on probation. He was released after two days.
After his release, Jett got a job. He then served a three-month sentence for his probation violation and moved to Atlanta in the summer of 2022. Federal officials had not yet indicted him at this point. During his year in Atlanta, Jett was employed and had no further criminal activity.
On February 1, 2023, while Jett was in Atlanta, a federal grand jury in Michigan indicted him on charges of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, possession with intent to distribute controlled substances, and being a felon in possession of a firearm. An arrest warrant was issued the following day.
In August 2023, Jett returned to Michigan for a funeral and was arrested at a liquor store with an illegal firearm in his pocket. A grand jury returned a superseding indictment in September 2023, adding an additional felon in possession charge.
Jett was released on bond with conditions, including residing at the Kalamazoo Probation Enhancement Program, abstaining from alcohol, and GPS monitoring. However, he repeatedly violated these conditions, including testing positive for alcohol multiple times. At a bond revocation hearing, he was found to have a blood alcohol level more than three times the legal limit. He was re-arrested and confined in the Newaygo County Jail.
In jail, Jett’s destructive behavior continued. In February 2024, he attempted to smuggle synthetic cannabinoids, known as K2, into the jail with the help of his child’s mother. Jail officials intercepted a package containing documents that tested positive for K2.
Three weeks after the attempted smuggling, Jett pleaded guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. During a probation interview to compile his Presentence Report (PSR), Jett denied any involvement in the K2 smuggling. After he persisted in his denial, the government emailed Jett’s counsel the evidence it would present at the sentencing hearing if he continued to deny his involvement. Jett responded that he would admit to the smuggling, and the probation office issued an initial PSR, which recommended that Jett receive a reduction for acceptance of responsibility but noted “reservations” because of Jett’s repeated denials during the interview. Jett later changed his mind again, and his counsel notified the government that Jett did not intend to admit responsibility for the K2. The probation office then issued a new PSR recommending that Jett not receive the reduction.
At sentencing, Jett argued for the acceptance-of-responsibility reduction, claiming he had not attempted to obtain K2. The government presented evidence of Jett’s communications with his child’s mother and the testimony of a Newaygo County Sheriff’s Office sergeant, who testified that Jett was caught trying to get a package of K2 by throwing a device with a string attached to another inmate pod. Deputies searched Jett’s cell and found K2 among his belongings. The district court credited the sergeant’s testimony and denied Jett the reduction. The court also considered Jett’s request for a downward variance based on his good behavior in Atlanta. Although the court acknowledged that Jett did not have a criminal record during that time, it still varied downward on the ground that Jett had lacked “youthful guidance.”
The Court’s Decision: Acceptance of Responsibility
One of the central issues in the appeal was whether the district court erred in denying Jett a reduction in his sentence for accepting responsibility. Under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, a defendant can receive a reduction if they “clearly demonstrate acceptance of responsibility for his offense.” However, the court found that Jett’s actions, particularly his continued criminal behavior while incarcerated, were inconsistent with accepting responsibility for his crime.
The Sixth Circuit upheld the district court’s decision, emphasizing that the district court is in the best position to assess a defendant’s acceptance of responsibility. The court pointed out that Jett’s behavior in jail, including attempting to smuggle drugs and denying his involvement, showed a lack of remorse and a continued disregard for the law. The court cited previous cases where similar conduct led to denial of the acceptance-of-responsibility reduction.
Jett argued that the district court improperly considered conduct “unrelated” to the methamphetamine offense. The Sixth Circuit rejected this argument, stating that Jett’s post-offense conduct, including the K2 incidents, was relevant to determining whether he had truly accepted responsibility for his drug trafficking. The court explained that Jett’s actions, which included the possession of drugs while incarcerated, demonstrated a failure to turn away from the lifestyle that had motivated his original offense.
The court also addressed Jett’s argument that the district court erred by referencing Application Note 1(A) of the Sentencing Guidelines. This note addresses how to treat “relevant conduct” when deciding if a defendant has accepted responsibility. The court noted that it was not clear whether the district court relied on this note, but even if it did, the district court’s conclusion was not clearly erroneous.
The Court’s Decision: Procedural Reasonableness
Jett also argued that his sentence was procedurally unreasonable because the district court failed to adequately address his argument for a downward variance based on his good behavior during the three years between the crime and his arrest. The appellate court declined to address this issue, stating that Jett had either waived this argument or invited any error.
The court cited the case of *United States v. Carter*, where the defendant’s attorney confirmed that the court had addressed all the arguments. The court found that Jett had done the same, and the court could not fault the district court for taking Jett at his word.
The court explained that requiring timely objections helps the district court correct errors. Since Jett told the district court that it had addressed all of his arguments, he could not later claim that it had not.