Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-06264/USCOURTS-ca10-91-06264-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Samuel Olvera Chapa
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F I L ~ D 

United Stat.es Court of Appc..z.b 

TENTH CIRCUIT 'f<'""+: 1 r: .. ,.11i'.; 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v . 

SAMUEL OLVERA CHAPA, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MAY 2 ~ 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKEE 

ClerL 

No . 91-6264 

(D.C. No. CR-91-45-T) 

(W . D. Oklahoma) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before LOGAN, SEYMOUR and MOORE, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously to honor the parties' request for a 

decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App . P. 

34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

Defendant Samuel o. Chapa appeals from his sentence imposed 

following a guilty plea to possessing a firearm after conviction 

of a crime that carried more than one year imprisonment, in 

violation of 18 u.s.c. § 922(g). The only issue on appeal is 

whether the district court erred in fai ling to reduce the base 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppe l . 10th Cir. R. 36 . 3. 

Appellate Case: 91-6264 Document: 010110249188 Date Filed: 05/22/1992 Page: 1
offense level pursuant to u.s.s.G. § 2K2.l(b)(l), which would 

provide for a decreased offense level if defendant possessed the 

gun for lawful hunting purposes.

1 

Defendant bore the burden of showing by a preponderance of 

the evidence that he was entitled to a reduction. United States 

v. Kirk, 894 F.2d 1162, 1164 (10th Cir. 1990). The firearm 

involved was a shotgun that defendant contended he possessed 

solely for hunting purposes. The district court did not accept 

defendant's version of the facts. "We review the district court's 

findings of fact which support its application of the Guidelines 

under the clearly erroneous standard." United States v. Reid, 911 

F.2d 1456, 1461 (10th Cir., 1990), cert. denied, 111 S. Ct. 990 

(1991). Our review of the record demonstrates no clear error in 

the district court's determination. The Commentary and 

Application Note concerning U.S.S.G. § 2K2.l(b)(l) provided: 

Under§ 2K2.l(b)(l), intended lawful use, as determined 

by the surrounding circumstances, provides a decrease in 

the offense level. Relevant circumstances include, 

among others, the number and type of firearms (sawed-off 

shotguns, for example, have few legitimate uses) and 

ammunition, the location and circumstances of 

possession, the nature of the defendant's criminal 

history (~, whether involving firearms), and the 

extent to which possession was restricted by local law. 

U.S.S.G. § 2K2.l(b)(l), comment. (n.2). 

The circumstances surrounding defendant's possession of the 

shotgun support the district court's finding that defendant was 

not entitled to a reduction in his base offense level. The weapon 

1 

U.S.S.G. § 2K2.l(b)(l) in effect at the time of defendant's 

sentencing provided: "If the defendant obtained or possessed the 

firearm or ammunition, other than a firearm covered in 26 u.s.c. 

§ 5845(a), solely for lawful sporting purposes or collection, 

decrease the offense level determined above to level 6." 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-6264 Document: 010110249188 Date Filed: 05/22/1992 Page: 2
was found fully loaded in defendant's home. The probation 

officers making the search found no other hunting equipment and 

defendant did not possess a valid hunting license . On similar 

facts the Ninth Circuit held that the sentencing court did not err 

in denying a reduction of the base offense level. See United 

States v. Uzelac, 921 F . 2d 204 (9th Cir. 1990) (defendant 

possessed loaded shotgun and could not show he ever had a hunting 

license); see also United States v. Dinges, 917 F.2d 1133, 1135-36 

(8th Cir. 1990) (defendant possessed loaded shotgun, numerous 

other weapons, and ammunition). In the case before us the 

officers also found additional ammunition, not only for the 

shotgun but for .38 and .22 caliber guns, and the officers seized 

from defendant a .38 caliber handgun that defendant asserted he 

had taken from his son the night before. Furthermore, the court 

was entitled to take into account defendant's criminal history, 

which included a prior conviction in 1987 of feloniously carrying 

a firearm, and his use of a firearm in a murder in 1976. We find 

no error. 

AFFIRMED. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

James K. Logan 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-6264 Document: 010110249188 Date Filed: 05/22/1992 Page: 3