UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal Action No. 93-97 (BAH) ANTONE WHITE, et al., Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION In 1994, Antone White, Eric Hicks, and Ronald Hughes were sentenced to life in prison after a jury found them guilty of drug trafficking and racketeering conspiracy offenses, stemming from White and Hicks’ leadership of, and Hughes’ membership in, the “First Street Crew,” which, from early 1988 until the defendants’ arrests approximately five years later, sold crack cocaine and engaged in “violent activities,” including murder and witness intimidation. United States v. White, 116 F.3d 903, 909–11 (D.C. Cir. 1997). Now, twenty-five years later, White and Hicks seek reductions of their sentences to time-served, and Hughes seeks a reduction in his supervised release term, based on Section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018 (“First Step Act”), Pub. L. 115-391, § 404, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018). See generally White’s Emergency Suppl. Mot. to Reduce Sentence (“White Mot.”), ECF No. 690; Hicks’ Mot. for Reduction of Sentence, ECF No. 684; Hicks’ Emergency Suppl. Mot. to Reduce Sentence (“Hicks Suppl. Mot.”), ECF No. 688; Hughes’ Emergency Mot. to Reduce Sentence (“Hughes Mot.”), ECF No. 695; Hughes Reply, ECF No. 707. 1 Section 404 makes retroactively available the more lenient penalties for 1 Hughes also initially requested a reduced sentence to “time served,” Hughes Mot. at 9, but completed his prison term on May 13, 2019, see Hughes Reply at 1, and subsequently revised his requested relief to seek only a reduced “term of supervised release” from five to three years, id. at 1, 14. 1 certain crack cocaine offenses enacted in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (“FSA”). Upon consideration of the defendants’ motions for sentence reductions pursuant to Section 404 of the First Step Act, for the reasons discussed below, White and Hughes’ motions are denied and Hicks’ motion is granted in part and otherwise denied. 2 I. BACKGROUND As necessary context for the resolution of the pending motions, summarized below is background regarding the defendants’ offense conduct, convictions and sentences, largely drawn from the defendants’ sentencing hearings and related documents, and the D.C. Circuit’s review of the defendants’ direct appeals of their convictions, followed by review of the relevant statutory background. A. Factual Background Starting in early 1988, for approximately five years until the defendants’ arrests, the “First Street Crew” sold “large amounts of crack” in the area of First and Thomas Streets, N.W. White, 116 F.3d at 909. Antone White “orchestrated the group’s activities,” working with several friends, including Eric Hicks from the outset and Ronald Hughes, who began working with White in 1990. Id. “Although White initially sold small amounts of cocaine, he soon became a wholesale supplier, selling ‘weight,’ . . . and fronting his cohorts smaller amounts of cocaine to sell for him.” Id. Hicks eventually “took charge when . . . White was ‘out of the neighborhood,’ i.e., in prison.” Id. The First Street ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals