United States v. Taylor ( 2022 )


Menu:
  • Case: 21-10557     Document: 00516203328         Page: 1     Date Filed: 02/15/2022
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Fifth Circuit                               United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    February 15, 2022
    No. 21-10557
    Summary Calendar                         Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    United States of America,
    Plaintiff—Appellee,
    versus
    Jason Carl Taylor,
    Defendant—Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:20-CR-206-1
    Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
    Per Curiam:*
    Jason Carl Taylor appeals the 96-month, within-guidelines sentence
    imposed upon his guilty plea to possession of a firearm as a felon. On appeal,
    he challenges the district court’s application of a sentence enhancement
    under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), which adds four levels if a defendant
    *
    Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
    opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
    circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
    Case: 21-10557      Document: 00516203328           Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/15/2022
    No. 21-10557
    “used or possessed any firearm or ammunition in connection with another
    felony offense.”       The presentence report (PSR) provided that the
    enhancement was warranted because Taylor threatened and pointed a
    shotgun at another individual. Taylor argues that the PSR lacked sufficient
    indicia of reliability and that the district court erred by relying on the PSR at
    sentencing.
    We review the district court’s factual findings for clear error. United
    States v. Alcantar, 
    733 F.3d 143
    , 146 (5th Cir. 2013). A PSR generally bears
    sufficient indicia of reliability to be considered by the sentencing judge in
    making factual determinations. United States v. Fuentes, 
    775 F.3d 213
    , 220
    (5th Cir. 2014). A “district court may properly find sufficient reliability on a
    [PSR] which is based on the results of a police investigation,” including those
    that rely on victim interviews. United States v. Vela, 
    927 F.2d 197
    , 201 (5th
    Cir. 1991); see Fuentes, 775 F.3d at 220. However, “[b]ald, conclusionary
    statements do not acquire the patina of reliability by mere inclusion in the
    PSR.” United States v. Elwood, 
    999 F.2d 814
    , 817-18 (5th Cir. 1993). If the
    PSR bears sufficient indicia of reliability, then the defendant has the burden
    of showing that the PSR is inaccurate. United States v. Zuniga, 
    720 F.3d 587
    ,
    591 (5th Cir. 2013).
    Here, the information in the PSR was based on the victim’s initial call
    to police and his subsequent interview at the scene. The victim’s statements
    were corroborated in at least three ways: Taylor and his car matched the
    victim’s description, the police found a shotgun in Taylor’s car, and Taylor
    admitted that he and the victim were in a verbal altercation. While additional
    corroboration from third-party witnesses would certainly strengthen the
    indicia of reliability, we have “never held that corroboration is necessary in
    order for a factual account contained in a PSR to bear sufficient indicia of
    reliability to support its consideration at sentencing.” United States v.
    Parkerson, 
    984 F.3d 1124
    , 1129 (5th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 
    2022 WL 89280
    2
    Case: 21-10557      Document: 00516203328           Page: 3     Date Filed: 02/15/2022
    No. 21-10557
    (U.S. Jan. 10, 2022) (No. 20-8345). Further, although no aggravated assault
    charges were filed, Texas “prosecutors have broad discretion in deciding
    which cases to prosecute.” Neal v. State, 
    150 S.W.3d 169
    , 173 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 2004) (en banc). Because the PSR contained sufficient indicia of
    reliability and Taylor failed to present any rebuttal evidence, the district court
    was entitled to rely on the PSR at sentencing. See Zuniga, 720 F.3d at 591.
    Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err by applying the
    enhancement, see Parkerson, 984 F.3d at 1130, and the judgment of the district
    court is AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-10557

Filed Date: 2/15/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/16/2022