Charles Raymond Wable v. United States

Petitioner was convicted at trial of being a felon in possession of a firearm and witness tampering. In the lead up to sentencing, he made several pro se arguments about the calculation of his advisory Guideline range and ultimate sentence, none of which his counsel adopted. One of those objections was to the classification of a prior conviction as a “controlled substance offense.” The district court classified the offense as such and calculated the advisory Guidelines range accordingly. On appeal, Petitioner restated his argument that the conviction was not a controlled substance offense, but on a different theory and buttressed by documentation that had not been presented to the district court. The question presented in this Petition is, in such circumstances, whether the Court of Appeals should review the question of whether a Petitioner’s prior conviction is a controlled substance offense de novo or only for plain error. -1-