February 16, 2018
from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 10 CR 673 -
Matthew F. Kennelly, Judge.
Wood, Chief Judge, and Kanne and Rovner, Circuit Judges.
is Gill's third time appealing his sentence after he pled
guilty in 2011 to one count of conspiracy to possess heroin
with intent to distribute. Twice before, we have remanded his
case for resentencing.
appeal, Gill argues he is entitled to yet another
re-sentencing for two reasons. First, he contends that the
district court should have reduced his sentencing guidelines
offense level because he accepted responsibility. But the
district court did not clearly err when it denied Gill the
reduction. Second, Gill insists that the district court
created unwarranted sentence disparities between himself and
his codefendants. But the district court sufficiently
addressed the sentence disparities and explained why Gill was
receiving a higher sentence than most of his codefendants.
Accordingly, we affirm.
facts relevant to Gill's current conviction are detailed
in our two prior opinions, United States v. Adams,
746 F.3d 734 (7th Cir. 2014), and United States v.
Gill, 824 F.3d 653 (7th Cir. 2016). We briefly summarize
was a high-level member of a large heroin distribution
operation that was led by Dana Bostic. After Bostic was shot
and Bostic's brother was murdered, Gill participated in a
retaliatory shooting. In November 2008, in Illinois state
court, Gill pled guilty to a charge of aggravated unlawful
use of a weapon in connection with that shooting. He was
sentenced to three years' imprisonment.
fall of 2009, the Chicago Police Department and the Drug
Enforcement Administration launched an investigation into
Bostic's organization that led to a federal indictment
against Gill and a number of the organization's other
members. After that indictment, on December 21, 2011, Gill
pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to possess heroin with
intent to distribute.
Gill's initial sentencing, the district court calculated
Gill's offense level to be 40 and assigned him a criminal
history score of III. It sentenced him to a below-guidelines
term of 329 months' imprisonment and ten years'
supervised release. Gill appealed, challenging only the
district court's application to his offense level of a
2-level enhancement for maintaining a drug premises. We
agreed that the enhancement was improper in light of
intervening authority and remanded the case. See
Adams, 746 F.3d at 743-45.
remand, the district court recalculated Gill's guidelines
offense level, removing the 2-level drug premises enhancement
and proactively removing another 2-level enhancement in
anticipation of a retroactive amendment to the Guidelines.
His new offense level was 36. The district court concluded
that Gill's criminal history score should remain the same
as it was in his first sentencing-III-and Gill did not
object. The score was based in part on Gill's prior state
conviction for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. The
district court imposed a within-guidelines sentence of 280
months' imprisonment and 10 years' supervised
then appealed his second sentence, challenging the district
court's use of his prior state conviction to calculate
his criminal history score and the district court's
failure to make adequate findings when imposing supervised
release conditions. We accepted both of his arguments and
issued a full remand for resentencing. See Gill, 824
F.3d at 659-63.
second remand, the district court reduced Gill's criminal
history score by removing his prior state conviction for
aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. Gill also asked the
court to further reduce his offense level because he had
accepted responsibility, but the district court denied the
reduction because Gill did not turn himself in for ten months
after his arrest warrant issued. (Gill had asked for the
reduction in his first sentencing hearing, and the district