Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 11-12-2024

Case Style:

United States of America v. Jimmy Ray Lightsey

Case Number: 3:18-CR-209

Judge: Marcia Morales Howard

Court: United States District District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Hillsborough County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney’s Office in Tampa

Defendant's Attorney:


Click Here For The Best Tampa Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory



Description:


Tampa, Florida criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with possessing a firearm as a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g) and 924(e).



Following a jury trial, Jimmy Ray Lightsey was convicted of
possessing a firearm as a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)
and 924(e); knowingly possessing with intent to distribute cocaine,
cocaine base, and marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1),
(b)(1)(C), and (b)(1)(D); and possessing a firearm in furtherance of
a drug-trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i).
At his sentencing, the district court determined that Lightsey was
an armed career criminal within the meaning of the Armed Career
Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) (“ACCA”), and enhanced Light-
sey’s sentence pursuant to that statute. Lightsey now appeals his
sentence of 240 months’ imprisonment, contending that the district
court plainly erred in finding that his prior convictions qualified as
predicate offenses under ACCA.

* * *

Before sentencing, a probation officer prepared a presen-
tence investigation report (“PSI”) that reported the following facts.
On June 24, 2018, a Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office detective saw Light-
sey driving with improperly tinted windows, then watched him
park and get out of the car to gather with a group of people hang-
ing out in a vacant lot. The detective recognized Lightsey from
prior interactions, ran his name through a computer database, and
discovered that Lightsey’s license was suspended. The detective
waited for backup to arrive and then arrested Lightsey. During the
arrest, officers saw a large bag of marijuana in plain view on the
center console of Lightsey’s car and a loaded handgun (which
turned out to be stolen) in plain view on the driver’s side floor-
board. They then searched the car and found 4 more bags of ma-
rijuana in the center console—together weighing a total of 46.4
grams. The officers also found in another compartment a pill bot-
tle containing 3.3 grams of cocaine and 0.7 grams of cocaine base
packaged for sale. Prior to this arrest, Lightsey had been convicted
of multiple felonies, including the 2000 and 2009 Florida 4 Opinion of the Court 20-13682
convictions for sale or delivery of cocaine and a 1997 conviction for
attempted armed robbery.

The PSI grouped Counts One and Two pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 3D1.2(c) and applied the higher offense level applicable to Count
One, as required by § 3D1.3(a). The statute governing Count Three
required a sixty-month consecutive sentence and thus, pursuant to
§ 3D1.1(b)(1), Count Three was not grouped with the others. As
to Counts One and Two, the probation officer calculated a base of-
fense level of 20 under § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A) because Lightsey violated §
922(g)(1) after sustaining a felony conviction for a controlled sub-
stance offense. The PSI then applied a two-level enhancement un-
der § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A) because the firearm Lightsey possessed was
stolen. Lightsey’s adjusted offense level was, therefore, 22. But the
PSI then increased the offense level to 33 because (a) Lightsey was
charged with possession of a firearm by a felon in Count One and
(b) he had at least three prior convictions on different occasions for
violent felonies or serious drug offenses, rendering him an “armed
career criminal” under § 4B1.4(b)(3)(B). Specifically, the PSI cited
Lightsey’s 1997 Florida conviction for attempted armed robbery,
2000 Florida conviction for sale of cocaine, and 2009 Florida con-
viction for sale or delivery of cocaine as predicate offenses for the
armed career criminal enhancement. Lightsey did not receive any
reduction for acceptance of responsibility, resulting in a total of-
fense level of 33. The probation officer calculated a criminal his-
tory score of six, which would typically yield a criminal history cat-
egory of III. But because of Lightsey’s status as an armed career
USCA11 Case: 20-1368220-13682 Opinion of the Court 5
criminal, the PSI increased his criminal history category to IV pur-
suant to § 4B1.4(c)(3).

Under § 924(e), Lightsey was subject to a statutory term of
imprisonment of fifteen years to life for Count One. As for Count
Two, the statutory maximum term was thirty years. His guideline
range on Counts One and Two was 188 to 235 months. On Count
Three, Lightsey faced a mandatory minimum of five years and a
maximum of life, to run consecutively to any other counts.
The PSI also summarized Lightsey’s personal history and
characteristics. In particular, the PSI reported that Lightsey’s child-
hood was unstable as he had been raised in foster care and fre-
quently ran away due to physical abuse. He was homeless at times
and his only male role models were other homeless men. He was
in the juvenile justice system from age thirteen until he was sen-
tenced to prison as an adult at age sixteen. Lightsey has three chil-
dren, each with a different woman, but he does not have contact
with any of them. Lightsey reported that he has suffered from bi-
polar disorder and schizophrenia since childhood, and that he re-
ceived some mental health counseling and medication between
2014 and 2016. Medical records showed that Lightsey was commit-
ted under the Baker Act twice, in July 2014 and October 2016, and
that he had attempted suicide at least once in 2016. Nassau County
Jail records reflected that Lightsey denied any history of mental
health problems during his evaluation there, and he was not pre-
scribed any psychotropic medication during his incarceration.
Lightsey reported some illegal drug use in his past and a urinalysis
USCA11 Case: 20-136826 Opinion of the Court 20-13682
performed at the time of his initial appearance in November 2018
had negative results. Lightsey dropped out of high school in 11th
grade and does not have a GED. He had some scattered employ-
ment history as a machine operator, truck driver, warehouse
worker, and landscaper. Of all this, the PSI concluded that Light-
sey’s personal history and characteristics may warrant a sentence
outside of the advisory guideline system but did not identify any
basis for departure from the guideline range.

Outcome: Affirmed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: