DocketNumber: 04-5604
Citation Numbers: 179 F. App'x 359
Judges: Siler, Rogers, Jordan
Filed Date: 5/17/2006
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/5/2024
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 06a0353n.06 Filed: May 17, 2006 No. 04-5604 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ) v. ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED ) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MELINDA MORRIS, A.K.A. MELINDA ) EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY MARTIN, ) ) Defendant-Appellant. ) Before: SILER and ROGERS, Circuit Judges; JORDAN, District Judge.* ROGERS, Circuit Judge. Melinda Morris appeals her sentence for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute methamphetamine in violation of21 U.S.C. § 846
. The government concedes that Morris is entitled to resentencing under United States v. Booker,543 U.S. 220
(2005), because the district court treated the Sentencing Guidelines range as mandatory rather than advisory. Accordingly, we vacate her sentence and remand for resentencing consistent with Booker. Morris’s additional argument—that the two-level enhancement to her sentence pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) was clearly erroneous because the presence of a firearm was not proven by * The Honorable R. Leon Jordan, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee, sitting by designation. No. 04-5604 United States v. Morris a preponderance of the evidence—is without merit. Based upon the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR), the district court found that Morris had admitted to possessing a firearm on May 21, 2001, when she pleaded guilty to the state-law offense of trafficking in a controlled substance “while being in possession of a .38-caliber handgun.” Morris argues that the possession of a firearm was not an element of her state conviction, but she provides no evidence to refute the findings of the PSR and district court. A defendant cannot show that a PSR is inaccurate simply by denying its truth, but must show “some evidence beyond a bare denial that calls the reliability or correctness of the alleged facts into question.” United States v. Lang,333 F.3d 678
, 681-82 (6th Cir. 2003). -2-