Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-07085/USCOURTS-ca10-89-07085-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Larry Lee Callihan
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

PUBLISH Tenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 0 CT 12 19Q0 

TENTH CIRCUIT ROBERT L. HOECKER 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

LARRY LEE CALLIHAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 89-7085 

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA 

(D.C. NO. 89-21-CR) 

SUBMITTED ON THE BRIEFS: 

Clerk 

Roger Hilfiger and Sheldon J. Sperling, Muskogee, Oklahoma, for 

Plaintiff-Appellee. 

Don Ed Payne, Payne and Welch, Hugo, Oklahoma, for DefendantAppellant. 

Before HOLLOWAY, Chief Judge, SEYMOUR, and ANDERSON, Circuit 

Judges. 

ANDERSON, Circuit Judge. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); lOth Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Larry Lee Callihan challenges the sentence he received after 

pleading guilty to conspiring to manufacture, possess with intent 

Appellate Case: 89-7085 Document: 01019311234 Date Filed: 10/12/1990 Page: 1 
to distribute, and distribute amphetamine, in violation of 21 

u.s.c. § 846. At the time of his arrest, 94 kilograms of 

phenalytic acid, sodium acetate, acetic anhydride, and phenyl-2-

propanone were seized. These chemicals, when heated under proper 

conditions, produce phenyl-2-propanone ("P2P"), a precursor of 

amphetamine and a controlled substance. Testimony at the sentencing hearing revealed that the amount of P2P actually present in 

the seized mixture was 2.95 kilograms. 

The district court determined the appropriate sentencing 

range based upon 94 kilograms of P2P. This resulted in an offense 

level of thirty-four. See United States Sentencing Comm'n, 

Guidelines Manual§ 201.1, comment. (n.10) (Oct. 1987). Callihan, 

who was sentenced to one hundred and twenty months in prison, 

contends that the sentence should instead have been based on 2.95 

kilograms, which would have resulted in an offense level of 

twenty-six. See id. The maximum sentence with that offense level 

would have been fifty-seven months. 

Whether the district court was correct depends upon the 

interpretation of a footnote to the drug quantity table accompanying section 201.1 of the guidelines: 

The scale amounts for all controlled substances refer to 

the total weight of the controlled substance. Consistent with the provisions of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, if 

any mixture or compound contains any detectable amount 

of a controlled substance, the entire amount of the 

mixture or compound shall be considered in measuring the 

quantity. 

u.s.s.G. § 201.1, table n.* (Oct. 1987). Callihan contends that 

"the total weight of the controlled substance" was 2.95 kilograms, 

and that the second sentence of the footnote means only that the 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-7085 Document: 01019311234 Date Filed: 10/12/1990 Page: 2 
controlled substance found in "the entire amount," instead of part 

of the amount, of a mixture or compound containing the controlled 

substance is the scale weight. 

We disagree. The footnote meant what it said: that the 

scale weight of a mixture or compound containing a controlled 

substance is the entire amount of the mixture or compound. United 

States v. McKeever, 906 F.2d 129, 133 (5th Cir. 1990); United 

States v. Meitinger, 901 F.2d 27, 29 & n.l (4th Cir. 1990); United 

States v. Murphy, 899 F.2d 714, 717 (8th Cir. 1990); United States 

v. Williams, 894 F.2d 208, 215 (6th Cir. 1990); see also United 

States v. Larsen, 904 F.2d 562, 563 (lOth Cir. 1990) (holding that 

"mixture or compound" in 21 U.S.C. § 841 includes the agent carrying the controlled substance). 

We reject Callihan's suggestion that the fact that the 

footnote has been rewritten to state that "the weight of a 

controlled substance set forth in the table refers to the entire 

weight of any mixture or substance containing a detectable amount 

of the controlled substance," u.s.s.G. § 201.1, table n.* (Nov. 

1989), shows that the note formerly had a different meaning. The 

revised footnote merely states more efficiently the content of its 

predecessor. 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 89-7085 Document: 01019311234 Date Filed: 10/12/1990 Page: 3