## Facts

- Eddie Pressley participated in a long-running heroin distribution conspiracy operating in and around a Brooklyn public-housing complex.
- The conspiracy distributed large quantities of heroin through many small, street-level transactions over time.
- No single transaction in which Pressley personally participated exceeded one kilogram of heroin.
- Pressley pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute at least one kilogram of heroin under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A)(i) and 846.
- In his plea allocution, Pressley admitted responsibility for distributing more than one kilogram of heroin over the course of the conspiracy.
- The district court sentenced Pressley to 292 months’ imprisonment under § 841(b)(1)(A)(i), which applies to offenses involving one kilogram or more of heroin.

## Issues

1. For applying § 841(b)’s quantity thresholds to a § 846 drug conspiracy, whether the “violation” is measured by the aggregate quantity of drugs attributable to the defendant over the life of the conspiracy, rather than the quantity involved in any single transaction.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the judgment and 292-month sentence.
- The court held that, for § 841(b) purposes, a drug conspiracy is a single “violation” that “involv[es]” the aggregate quantity of narcotics attributable to the defendant throughout the conspiracy.
- The court rejected the argument that sentencing must be based only on the largest single transaction in which the defendant participated.

## Legal Principles

- In a prosecution for conspiracy to distribute drugs under 21 U.S.C. § 846, § 841(b)’s penalty thresholds are determined by aggregating the drug quantities attributable to the defendant over the course of the conspiracy.
- The statutory terms “a violation” and “involving” in § 841(b) permit treating the conspiracy as a continuing offense, not a series of isolated sales for threshold purposes.
- Conspiracy attribution principles allow holding a defendant responsible for drug quantities distributed in furtherance of the jointly undertaken activity that are attributable to the defendant (including quantities admitted in a guilty plea).
- A defendant who admits responsibility for an aggregate amount meeting a higher § 841(b) threshold cannot avoid that threshold by parsing the conspiracy into sub-threshold individual transactions.

## Conclusion

The court upheld sentencing under § 841(b)(1)(A)(i) because a drug-distribution conspiracy “involv[es]” the aggregated quantity attributable to the defendant across the entire conspiracy, even when the total consists of many smaller sales.


United States v. Pressley, 469 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2006)