First Circuit: US v. Pinkham

Exception claiming that drug amount was miscalculated does not properly preserve a claim that the amount of drugs personally consumed by the deft should not have been included in the total.

Neither precedent nor lenity argues that the personal consumption of the deft should reduce the drug amount calculations for the conspiracy, as the deft's consumption is part of the scope of the conspiracy.

Given that the penalty for the prior conviction for driving without a licence is more similar to that for driving with a suspended licence than that for speeding, the present sentencing court did not plainly err in grouping it with offenses of the former category.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-1664P-01A.pdf