Cite as: 526 U. S. 314 (1999)
Opinion of the Court
of cocaine in 1992. Petitioner put on no evidence at sentencing, nor did she testify to rebut the Government's evidence about drug quantity. Her counsel argued, however, that the three documented sales to Mack constituted the only evidence of sufficient reliability to be credited in determining the quantity of cocaine attributable to her for sentencing purposes.
After this testimony at the sentencing hearing the District Court ruled that, as a consequence of her guilty plea, petitioner had no right to remain silent with respect to the details of her crimes. The court found credible the testimony indicating petitioner had been a drug courier on a regular basis. Sales of 11/2 to 2 ounces twice a week for a year and a half put her over the 5-kilogram threshold, thus mandating a minimum sentence of 10 years. "One of the things" persuading the court to rely on the testimony of the codefend-ants was petitioner's "not testifying to the contrary." Id., at 95.
The District Judge told petitioner:
" 'I held it against you that you didn't come forward today and tell me that you really only did this a couple of times. . . . I'm taking the position that you should come forward and explain your side of this issue.
" 'Your counsel's taking the position that you have a Fifth Amendment right not to. . . . If he's—if it's determined by a higher Court that he's right in that regard, I would be willing to bring you back for resentencing. And if you—if—and then I might take a closer look at the [codefendants'] testimony.' " Id., at 98-99.
The District Court sentenced petitioner to the statutory minimum of 10 years of imprisonment, 6 years of supervised release, and a special assessment of $200.
The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the sentence. 122 F. 3d 185 (1997). According to the Court of Appeals: "By voluntarily and knowingly pleading guilty to
319
Page: Index Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007