FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT AUGUST 3, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 16487 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 0 0 0 4 2 - CR- 5 - RS U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s C A L V I N L E E J O H N S O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe N or the rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A u gu s t 3, 2007)

B efo re T JO F L A T , B L A C K an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

C a l vi n L e e J ohns on appe a l s hi s s e nt e nc e f ordi s tr i but i on of

m or e tha n 50 gr a m s of c oc a i ne ba s e , 21 U . S . C . § 841( b) ( 1) ( A ) ( i i i ) . J ohns on ge ne r a l l y c ont e nds the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by a ddi ng tw o poi nt s t o hi s c r i m i na l hi s t ory s c or e , pur s ua nt to U .S .S .G . § 4 A 1 .1 ( d ) , r e n d e r in g h im in e lig ib le f o rs a f e ty - v a lv e r e lie f

. W e a d d r e s s h is s p e c if

ic a r g u m e n ts in tu rn , a n d a f f irm h is s e n te n c e . W he n c a l c ul a t i ng the de f e nda nt ’ s c r i m i na l hi s t orys c or e , the s e nt e nc i ng c our tm us ta dd tw o c r i m i na l hi s t ory poi nt s “ i f the de f e nda ntc om m i tt e d the i ns t a nt offe nse w hi l e und erany c ri m i nal j ust i ce se nt ence , i ncl ud i ng prob at i on , parol e, s u p e rv i s e d r e l e a s e , i m p r i s o n m e n t , wo rk r e l e a s e , o re s c ap e s t a tu s . ” U. S . S . G. § 4 A 1 .1 ( d ) . T h e c o m m e n ta ry to th is g u id e lin e f u r th e re x p la in s th a t [a ] defe nd antw ho com m i t s the i nst antoffe nse w hi l e a vi ol a t i on w a rr a ntf

r om a pr i ors e nt e nc e i s out s t a ndi ng ( e . g. , a pr oba t i on, pa r ol e , ors upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e vi ol a t i on w arra nt ) s hal l be deem ed t o b e und era c ri m i nal j ust i ce se nt ence for the pu rposes of thi s provi si on i f that se nt ence i s otherw i se coun t abl e, even i f thatse nt ence w o u ld h a v e e x p ir e d ab s e n t s u c h w a rr a n t. U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1 . 1 , co m m en t . (n . 4 ). A d efen d an tw h o co m m i t s th e i n st an to ffen se w hi l e a pr oba t i on- vi ol a t i on w a rr a ntf r om a pr i ors e nt e nc e i s out s t a ndi ng s ha l l be deem ed t o b e und era c ri m i nal j ust i ce se nt ence for purpo se s of § 4A 1. 1(d) i f that s e nt e nc e i s othe rw i s e c ount abl e , e ve n i f tha ts e nt e nc e w oul d ha ve e xpi r e d abs e nt s u c h w a rr a n t. U .S .S .G . § 4 A 1 .2 ( m ) .3

J ohns on f

i r s tc ont e nds , w i thoutl e ga l s uppor t , tha thi s 1998 pr oba t i onv io la tio n w a rr a n t w a s to o r e m o te in tim e to b e c o n s id e r e d a c tiv e . “‘T h e p la in l angu age of the G ui del i nes i nd i ca t es thattw o p oi nt s a re t o b e a dd ed w henever an o u ts ta n d in g w a rr a n t is in e x is te n c e , r e g a r d le s s o f w h e th e rth e w a rr a n t is s ta le p u r s u a n t to s ta te la w a t th e tim e o f s e n te n c in g , a n d irr e s p e c tiv e o f w h e th e rs ta te autho ri t i es m ayhave been l ax i n att em pt i ng t o execut e the w arra nt . ’ ” D a v is , 313 F . 3d 1300, 1305 ( 11th C i r . 2002) ( quot i ng U n i ted S ta tes v. E lm o re , 108 F . 3d 23, 27 (3d C i r. 19 97 )) . “ [R ] egar dl es s of how l on g a w arra nthas bee n o ut st andi ng , as l ong a s a vi ol a t i on w a rr a nte xi s t s , i ti s a c r i m i na l j us t i c e s e nt e nc e f orpurpos e s of the cr i m i nal hi st ory c al cul at i on . ” I d. a t 1 3 0 6 . J o h n s o n c o n c e d e d th e r e w a s a n o u t s t a n d i n g w a rr a n ta g a i n s th i m a tth e t i me he c om m i tt e d the i ns t a ntof f e ns e s . F ur the r , J ohns on di d notdi s put e tha tthe s e n te n c e f

o rw h ic h th e p r o b a tio n - v io la tio n w a rr a n t w a s is s u e d , n a m e ly , h is f ir s td e g r e e f o r g e ry c o n v ic tio n , w a s o th e rw is e c o u n tab le . See U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1. 2(m ). It w a s i rr e l e va ntw he the rthe w a rr a ntbe c a m e i nva l i d due t o the l a c k of di l i ge nc e by s t a t e a uthor i t i e s i n f

a i l i ng t o e xe c ut e i t , ortha ti tw a s t oo r e m ot e i n t i m e t o be c o n s id e r e d . See D a v is , 313 F . 3d a t1305- 06. M or e ove r , the G ove rnm e ntw a s not r e q u ir e d to p r o v e th a t th e w a rr a n t w a s n o t s ta le . See i d. T hus , the a r gum e ntthe w a rr a n t w a s to o r e m o te is w ith o u t m e r it.4

J ohns on a l s o m a i nt a i ns , a ga i n w i thoutl e ga l s uppor t , tha tthe a s s e s s m e ntof tw o add i t i on al cr i m i nal hi st ory poi nt s w as i m prop erbecause no evi dence s ho w ed th a t J o h n s o n h a d n o tic e th a t av io la tio n o f p r o b a tio n w a rr a n t w a s p e n d in g . A d e f e n d a n t is n o t r e q u ir e d to k n o w th a t ap r o b a tio n - v io la tio n w a rr a n t is o u ts ta n d in g . See U . S . S . G . § 4A 1. 1( d) . F ur the r , J ohns on a dm i tt e d tha the vi ol a t e d the t e rm s of hi s pr oba t i on by f

a i l i ng t o r e por tt o pr oba t i on a uthor i t i e s i n F l or i da . M or e ove r , our de c i s i on i n U

ni te d State s v . P hi l l i

ps , 4 1 3 F .3 d 1 2 8 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) , ce rt. deni ed , 126 S . C t . 1594 ( 2006) , i s i ns truc t i ve w i th r e s pe c tt o thi s a r gum e nt . I n P hi l l i ps , we hel d a defendant ’ s s ubj ec t i ve bel i ef re gardi ng w hether or nothi s par ol e t erm had e x p ir e d w a s irr e le v a n t. I d. at 1 2 9 2 . S im il ar ly, i n th e in stan t cas e, Jo h n so n ’s subj ec t i ve bel i ef

re gardi ng w hether or nota probat i on -vi ol at i on w arra nthad b ee n is s u e d a g a in s t h im w a s irr e le v a n t. F i na l l y , J ohns on a r gue s , c i t i ng ac a s e f r om a nothe rc i r c ui t , tha ti tw oul d be unf a i rt o a s s e s s c r i m i na l hi s t ory poi nt s i f hi s i nabi l i ty t o pa y r e s t i tut i on w a s the b asi s fo r th e p ro b at i o n -v i o l at i o n w arran t . T h i s arg u m en ti s w i th o u tm eri tb ecau se w e ha ve he l d the di s tr i c tne e d noti nqui r e i nt o the w a rr a nt ’ s va l i di tyorthe r e a s on the w arra ntw as i ss ued b ef ore app l yi ng the tw o-po i ntenhancem entun der § 4 A 1 .l( d ) . See D a v is , 3 1 3 F .3 d a t 1 3 0 5 .5

Ac c o r d i n g l y , we c o n c l u d e th a tth e d i s tr i c tc o u r td i d n o te rri n a d d i n g two p o in ts to J o h n s o n ’s c r im in a l h is to ry s c o r e , p u r s u a n t to U .S .S .G . § 4 A 1 .1 ( d ) . See i d. , 313 F . 3d a t1305 ( r e vi e w i ng “ adi s tr i c tc ourt ’ s f a c tua l f i ndi ngs f orc l e a re rr or an d i t s ap p l i cat i o n o f th e S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es t o th o se fact s de no vo ” ) . AF F I RME D.