Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-19-10873/USCOURTS-ca5-19-10873-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Deron Lewis Edwards
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-10873

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DERON LEWIS EDWARDS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:19-CR-2-1

Before WIENER, HAYNES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Deron Lewis Edwards pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a 

firearm. Because he possessed the firearm in connection with his commission 

of a felony drug offense analogous to 21 U.S.C. § 841, the district court applied 

the U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(c)(1)(A) cross-reference to U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1 and then used 

U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 to calculate his offense level. Now on appeal, Edwards 

challenges the district court’s application of a two-level § 2D1.1(b)(1) 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 2, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 19-10873 Document: 00515370282 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/02/2020
No. 19-10873

2

dangerous weapon enhancement based on his possession of the firearm 

underlying his offense of conviction.

We review the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines 

de novo and its factual findings for clear error. United States v. ReynaEsparza, 777 F.3d 291, 293-94 (5th Cir. 2015). First, Edwards cites no 

language in the relevant guidelines suggesting that applying the § 2D1.1(b)(1) 

enhancement was expressly prohibited double counting, see United States v. 

Jimenez-Elvirez, 862 F.3d 527, 541 (5th Cir. 2017), and we have previously 

rejected an indistinguishable argument, see United States v. Andrus, No. 92-

2708, 1993 WL 529720, at *2 (5th Cir. Nov. 30, 1993) (unpublished but 

precedential pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.3). 

Second, the record supports the application of the dangerous weapon 

enhancement. See United States v. Rodriguez-Guerrero, 805 F.3d 192, 195 (5th 

Cir. 2015). Edwards’s argument that § 2X1.1(a) requires an additional

evidentiary showing for specific offense characteristics based on conduct that 

actually occurred is inconsistent with that guideline, the commentary, and our 

precedent. See § 2X1.1(a) comment. (n.2); United States v. Cabrera, 288 F.3d 

163, 169-70 (5th Cir. 2002).

AFFIRMED.

Case: 19-10873 Document: 00515370282 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/02/2020