Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cr-00983/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cr-00983-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Paul Rodger Terry
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Paul Rodger Terry, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR-04-983-PHX-DGC

ORDER

Defendant has filed a Motion for Order Compelling Disclosure of Confidential

Informants. Doc. #111. Defendant asks the Court to compel the disclosure of confidential

informants who allegedly saw Defendant with a shotgun. The report of these informants has

been cited in the Presentence Report as a basis for enhancing Defendant’s offense level by

four levels under Guideline § 2K2.1(b)(5) (possession of any firearm in connection with

another felony offense). 

The Government states that it cannot disclose the identities of the confidential

informants without compromising their future cooperation with the Government and possibly

their safety. Doc. #112. As a result, the Government suggests that the Court not apply the

four level enhancement under § 2K2.1(b)(5). Id.

“The government bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence,

the facts necessary to enhance a defendant’s offense level under the Guidelines.” United

States v. Burnett, 16 F.3d 358, 361 (9th Cir. 1994). Because Defendant has challenged the

evidence on which the four level enhancement is based and the Government has declined to

Case 2:04-cr-00983-DGC Document 114 Filed 08/24/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

come forward with evidence supporting the enhancement, the Court will not apply the

enhancement at the time of sentencing. Given this conclusion, Defendant’s motion is moot

and will be denied.

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Order Compelling Disclosure of

Confidential Informants (Doc. #111) is denied as moot.

DATED this 23rd day of August, 2006.

Case 2:04-cr-00983-DGC Document 114 Filed 08/24/06 Page 2 of 2