FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT FEB RUARY 10 , 2006 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. 05- 10715 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 9 8 - 0 0 0 4 6 - CR- 4 - RH - W CS 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 L A U D E L O U I S D U B O C , 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 orthe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 10, 2006) B efo re D U B IN A , C A RN E S an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: A ppe l l a ntC l aude L oui s D uboc , pr oc e e di ng p ro se , ap p e a ls h is 6 0 - m o n th2

c ons e c ut i ve s e nt e nc e i m pos e d a f t e rr e m a nd f

orc ons pi r a c y t o t a m pe rw i th a w i tne s s , i n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . §§ 1512( b) ( 1) a nd 371, a nd a l s o c ha l l e nge s the i m po si t i on of an abov e- gu i del i nes f i ne of $ 2 50 , 00 0, ar gu i ng thatthe di stri ctcourt e rr e d in r e - s e n te n c in g h im . H e a ls o a lle g e s th a t h is p r io rc o u n s e l w a s in e f f e c tiv e . A j ury c onvi c t e d D uboc of c ons pi r a c y t o t a m pe rw i th aw i tne s s , i n vi ol a t i on o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 7 1 ( c o u n t 1 ( b ) ) ; c o n s p ir a c y to c o m m it m o n e y lau n d e r in g , in vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . § 1956( h) ( c ount2) ; a nd m one y l aunde r i ng, i n vi ol a t i on of 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 5 6 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ) ( c o u n ts 3 - 7 ) . D u b o c c o m m itte d th e s e o f f e n s e s w h ile a w a i t i ng s e nt e nc i ng a f

t e rpl e a di ng gui l ty i n 1994 t o c ons pi r a c y t o i m portdrugs a nd conspi ra cyt o l aund erthe proceeds f rom the sa l e of drugs (the 19 94 ca se i s r ef erre d t o h erei n as D ub oc I

). D ub oc re ce i ved a 23 6 m on th sent ence i n the i nst antca se , (D ub oc II

) , w hi c h i nc l ude d c onc urr e nts e nt e nc e s of 60 m onths on c ount1( b) a nd 2 3 6 m o n th s o n th e rem ai n i n g co u n t s. D u b o c ap p e a le d a n d w e r e v e r s e d h is c onvi c t i ons f

orc ons pi r a c y t o c om m i tm one y l aunde r i ng a nd va r i ous c ount s of m one y l aunde r i ng be c aus e of al a c k of s uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e t o s upportthe conv i ct i on s. W e a l so re vers ed a di stri ctcourtorder grant i ng forf ei ture butaf

fi rm ed D uboc ’ s c onvi c t i on f

orc ons pi r a c y t o t a m pe rw i th aw i tne s s . O n r e m a nd, the d is tr ic t c o u rt s e n te n c e d D u b o c to 6 0 m o n th s im p r is o n m e n t to ru n c o n s e c u tiv e ly to the l i fe se nt ence he w as se rvi ng as a r es ul tof D ub oc I, three ye ar s of s up ervi se d3

r e le a s e , an d im p o s e d a$ 2 5 0 ,0 0 0 f in e . D ub oc as se rt s thatthe di stri ctcourtse nt ence d h i m un der the w rong cr i m i nal s t a tu t e w h e n i ts e n t e n c e d h i m u n d e r1 8 U . S. C. § 3 7 1 , i n s t e a d o f 1 8 U . S. C. § 1 51 2(b)(1). H e a ss ert s thatthe st atut ory m axi m um for hi s off ense w as 10 ye ar s and h i s 60 m on th sent ence i s a l m osthal f of w hatthe l aw dem ands. H e not es that h i s o ffen se l ev el sh o u l d h av e b een cal cu l at ed u n d er U . S . S . G . § 2 J1 . 2 , w h i ch cro ssre fe re nces § 2 X 3. 1, and h i s bas e off ense l evel shou l d h ave been 30. H e a ss ert s that the gui de l i ne s i n e f

f e c ta tthe t i m e of

hi s r e - s e nt e nc i ng s houl d ha ve be e n appl i e d, a n d , u n d e rU .S .S .G . § 1 B 1 .3 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) , th e in s ta n t o f f e n s e w a s c o n d u c t r e le v a n t to the of f e ns e s he c om m i tt e d i n D ub oc I b e c au s e h e c o m m itte d th e in s ta n t o f f e n s e in a n e f f ortt o a voi d r e s pons i bi l i ty f orthos e of

f e ns e s . H e a s s e rt s tha tthe pr oba t i on of f i c e r ’ s de t e rm i na t i on of

the ba s e of

f e ns e l e ve l a nd s e nt e nc e w a s c orr e c t , butthe d i s tr i c tc o u rte rr e d b y n o tf o l l o wi n g th e P S I ’ s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n a n d r e a s o n i n g . He ar gu es that18 U . S . C . § 1 51 2(b)(1) and U . S . S . G . § 5 G 1. 3(b) re qu i re d the di stri ct c o u rt to d e te rm in e h is s e n te n c e in th e in s ta n t o f f e n s e b a s e d o n th e c o n d u c t in D ub oc I tha tr e s ul t e d i n the gr e a t e s ts e nt e nc e , a nd be c aus e the c onduc ti n D ub oc I i s use d i n the i nst antca se , thatcond ucti s “ ful l y c on si dere d” i n thi s c as e, w hi ch m e a n s th e s e n te n c e s f

r o m b o th c a s e s s h o u ld ru n c o n c u rr e n tly . I n r e vi e w i ng as e nt e nc e , w e r e vi e w adi s tr i c tc ourt ’ s f a c tua l f i ndi ngs f or4

cl ear erro r an d rev i ew th e co u rt ’ s ap p l i cat i o n o f th e g u i d el i n es t o th o se fact s de no vo . U n i ted S ta tes v. B ra d

f o rd , 2 7 7 F .3 d 1 3 1 1 , 1 3 1 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) . “M u ltip le t e rm s of i m pr i s onm e nti m pos e d a tdi f f e r e ntt i m e s run c ons e c ut i ve l yunl e s s the c ourtor de r s tha tthe t e rm s a r e t o run c onc urr e nt l y . ” 18 U . S . C . § 3584( a ) . T he c ourtm us tc ons i de rthe f a c t or s s e tf

orth i n 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) i n de t e rm i ni ng w h e th e rto o r d e rth e s e n te n c e s to ru n c o n c u rr e n tly o rc o n s e c u tiv e ly . 1 8 U .S .C . § 3584( b) . T he f

a c t or s i n § 3553( a ) i nc l ude : 1) the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the of f e ns e ; 2) the hi s t ory a nd c ha r a c t e r i s t i c s of the de f e nda nt ; 3) the ne e d f

orthe s e nt e nc e i m pos e d t o r e f l e c tthe s e r i ous ne s s of

the of f e ns e , pr om ot e r e s pe c tf

orthe la w , a n d p r o v id e ju s t p u n is h m e n t f o rth e o f f e n s e ; 4 ) th e n e e d f

o rth e s e n te n c e to pr ot e c tthe publ i c f

r om f urthe rc r i m e s of

the de f e nda nt ; a nd 5) the S e nt e nc i ng G u id e lin e s . 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) .

“ S ec t i on 5G 1. 3 i s the re l evantG ui del i nes provi si on i n d et erm i ni ng w hether t o i m po se a c on se cut i ve se nt ence on a def endantsubj ec tt o an u nd i sc harged t erm of i m pri sonm ent . ” B ra d f o rd , 27 7 F . 3d at13 17 . A tthe t i m e of hi s ori gi nal s e n te n c in g , § 5 G 1 .3 p r o v id e d th a t: (a ) I f the i nst antoffe nse w as com m i tt ed w hi l e the defendantw as se rvi ng a t erm of i m pri sonm ent. . . or af t erse nt enci ng for, bu tbefore c om m e nc i ng s e rvi c e of

, s uc h t e rm of

i m pr i s onm e nt , the s e nt e nc e f or the i ns t a ntof

f e ns e s ha l l be i m pos e d t o run c ons e c ut i ve l y t o the u n d is c h a r g e d te rm o f

im p r is o n m e n t.5

( b) I f s ubs e c t i on ( a ) doe s notappl y , a nd the undi s c ha r ge d t e rm of im p r is o n m e n t r e s u lte d f r o m o f f e n s e ( s ) th a t h a v e b e e n f u lly ta k e n in to a c c ounti n the de t e rm i na t i on of the of f e ns e l e ve l f

orthe i ns t a nt of f e ns e , the s e nt e nc e f

orthe i ns t a ntof

f e ns e s ha l l be i m pos e d t o run c o n c u rr e n tly to th e u n d is c h a r g e d te rm o f im p r is o n m e n t. ( c ) ( P ol i c y S t a t e m e nt ) I n a ny othe rc a s e , the s e nt e nc e f orthe i ns t a nt of f e ns e m a y be i m pos e d t o run c onc urr e nt l y , pa rt i a l l y c onc urr e nt l y , or c o n s e c u tiv e ly to th e p r io ru n d is c h a r g e d te rm o f im p r is o n m e n t to a c h ie v e ar e a s o n ab le p u n is h m e n t f o rth e in s ta n t o f

f e n s e . U .S .S .G . § 5 G 1 .3 ( 1 9 9 8 ) ; se e a l so U ni te d State s v . B ordon , 421 F . 3d 1202, 1206- 12 07 (11th C i r. 20 05 ) ( ho l di ng thatpu rs uantt o the F ee ney A m endm ent , gu i del i nes appl i cabl e on d at e of ori gi nal se nt enci ng ar e app l i ed on re -s ent enci ng ). U nd er s u b s e c tio n ( b ) o f

§ 5 G 1 .3 , to d e te rm in e w h a t c o n d u c t m u s t b e “f u lly ta k e n in to ac coun t , ” w e m ustdeci de w hatcr i m i nal ac t i vi ty U . S . S . G . § 1 B 1. 3 tre at s a s

“ re l evantcond uct . ” U

ni te d State s v . B lanc , 1 4 6 F .3 d 8 4 7 , 8 5 1 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) .

“ A ct i v i ty th atm eet s th e d efi n i t i o n o f ‘ rel ev an tco n d u ct ’ u n d er sect i o n 1 B 1 . 3 m u st b e ‘ fu l l y t ak en i n t o acco u n t ’ w h en d et erm i n i n g w h eth er sect i o n 5 G 1 . 3 (b ) ap p l i es, r e g a r d le s s o f

w h e th e rth e d is tr ic t c o u rt a c tu a lly c o n s id e r e d th e a c tiv ity w h e n it ca l cul at ed the base l evel . ” I d. S e c t i on 1B 1. 3( a ) ( 1) pr ovi de s tha tade f e nda nt ’ s ba s e of

f e ns e l e ve l s ha l l be de t e rm i ne d ba s e d on: ( A ) a l l a c t s a nd om i s s i ons c om m i tt e d, a i de d, abe tt e d, c ouns e l e d, c o m m a n d e d , in d u c e d , p r o c u r e d , o rw illf u lly c au s e d b y th e d e f

e n d a n t; a nd6

( B ) in th e c a s e o f

ajo in tly u n d e rta k e n c r im in a l a c tiv ity . . ., a ll r e a s onabl y f

or e s e e abl e a c t s a nd om i s s i ons of othe r s i n f

urthe r a nc e of th e j o i n t l y u n d ert ak en cri m i n al act i v i ty, th a t o c c u rr e d d u r in g th e c o m m is s io n o f th e o f f e n s e o f c o n v ic tio n , in p r e p a r a tio n f

o rth a t o f f e n s e , o rin th e c o u r s e o f a tte m p tin g to a v o id det ec t i on or re spon si bi l i ty f or thatoffe nse; U .S .S .G . § 1 B 1 .3 ( a ) ( 1 ) . S e c tio n 3 7 1 o f

T itle 1 8 p r o h ib its ac o n s p ir a c y b y tw o o rm o r e p e o p le to c om m i ta n of

f e ns e a ga i ns tthe U ni t e d S t a t e s ort o de f r aud the U ni t e d S t a t e s . 18 U .S .C . § 3 7 1 . T h e m a x im u m s e n te n c e u n d e r§ 3 7 1 is f iv e y e a r s im p r is o n m e n t. I d. S ect i o n 1 5 1 2 (b ) o f T i t l e 1 8 p ro h i b i t s t am p eri n g w i th a w i tn ess, an d carri es a m a xi m um s e nt e nc e of

t e n y e a r s i m pr i s onm e nt . 18 U . S . C . § 1512( b) ( E f f . 1996- 20 02 ). A f t e rr e vi e w i ng the r e c or d, w e c onc l ude tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notr e l y on the w rong st atut e i n d et erm i ni ng D ub oc’ s s ent ence . B ec ause D ub oc w as conv i ct ed of c ons pi r a c y t o t a m pe rw i th aw i tne s s , a s oppos e d t o the s ubs t a nt i ve of f e ns e of t am peri ng w i th a w i tness , the appl i cabl e s t atut e f or hi s off ense w as § 3 71 , w hi ch p r o v id e s f

o ram a x im u m s e n te n c e o f 6 0 m o n th s im p r is o n m e n t. T h e c o u rt a ls o d id noti m pr ope r l y c a l c ul a t e the gui de l i ne r a nge . A l though D uboc a s s e rt s tha tthe d is tr ic t c o u rt im p r o p e r ly c a lc u la te d h is b a s e o f f e n s e le v e l a n d c o n te n d s th a t h is b a s e o f f e n s e le v e l s h o u ld h a v e b e e n 3 0 , th e p r e s e n te n c e in v e s tig a tio n r e p o rt r e v e a ls7

tha thi s ba s e of

f e ns e l e ve l w a s 30 a nd w a s de t e rm i ne d i n the s a m e m a nne rD uboc a s s e rts it s h o u ld h a v e b e e n c a lc u la te d . F in a lly , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t e rrin i m p o si n g a co n secu t i v e sen t en ce. F i rst , § 5 G 1 . 3 (a) d o es n o tap p l y i n th i s case be c aus e D uboc c om m i tt e d the i ns t a ntof f e ns e pr i ort o be i ng s e nt e nc e d i n D ub oc I. A ddi t i ona l l y , § 5G 1. 3( b) doe s notappl y be c aus e the of f e ns e s i nvol ve d i n D ub oc I w e r e not“ f

ul l y t a ke n i nt o a c c ount ” i n de t e rm i ni ng D uboc ’ s of f e ns e l e ve l i n the i ns t a ntof

f e ns e . A s ar e s ul t , § 5G 1. 3( c ) gove rne d the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de c i s i on a nd al l ow ed the courtt o i m po se a s ent ence i n a m anner i tdeem ed w ou l d “ ac hi eve a re as on abl e pun i shm entfor the i nst antoffe nse. ” I d. I n m a ki ng i t s de c i s i on, the c ourtc ons i de r e d the gui de l i ne s a nd othe rf a c t or s l i s t e d i n § 3553( a ) , a s r e qui r e d by § 3 5 8 4 , a n d d e te rm in e d th a t ac o n s e c u tiv e s e n te n c e w a s ap p r o p r ia te . N e xt , D uboc a s s e rt s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtf a i l e d t o m a ke s pe c i f

i c f i ndi ngs w he n i ti m pos e d af

i ne above the gui de l i ne r a nge a nd f a i l e d t o gi ve hi m pr i or no t i ce of i t s c on t em pl at i on of a f i ne abov e the gu i del i ne rang e. H e c on t ends that h i s fi n e i s ex cessi v e b ecau se i ti s d i sp ro p o rt i o n at e t o h i s o ffen se, an d th e o ffen se c onduc tw a s a l r e a dy c ons i de r e d i n D ub oc I. B e c aus e D uboc di d notobj e c tt o the c ourt ’ s i m pos i t i on of af i ne above the g u id e lin e r a n g e , w e w ill r e v ie w h is c la im f o rp la in e rr o r . U

ni ted Stat es v. M

au ri ce , 6 9 F .3 d 1 5 5 3 , 1 5 5 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 5 ) . S im ila r ly , b e c au s e D u b o c d id n o t o b je c t to8

the court ’ s f

ai l ure t o g i ve hi m pri or no t i ce as re qu i re d u nd er B urns v. U ni ted Stat es , 5 0 1 U. S . 1 2 9 , 1 1 1 S . C t . 2 1 8 2 , 2 1 8 6 - 2 1 8 7 , 1 1 5 L . E d . 2 d 1 2 3 ( 1 9 9 1 ) , we re vi ew the B urns v io la tio n f o rp la in e rr o r . U

ni ted Stat es v. H

un er lach , 258 F . 3d 12 82 , 12 87 -128 8 (11 th C i r. 20 01 ). P l ai n err or occurs w hen there i s ( 1) an error; ( 2) tha ti s pl a i n orobvi ous ; ( 3) a f f e c t s the de f

e nda nt ’ s s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s ; a nd ( 4) se ri ou sl y a ff

ec t s the fa i rnes s, i nt egri ty, or pu bl i c r eput at i on of the j ud i ci al p r o c e e d in g s . U

ni te d State s v . O lano , 507 U . S . 725, 732, 113 S . C t . 1770, 1776, 12 3 L . E d. 2d 50 8 (19 93 ).

“B urns r e q u ir e s th e d is tr ic t c o u rt to g iv e ‘r e a s o n ab le n o tic e ’ th a t it is c ont e m pl a t i ng a n upw a r d de pa rtur e i n the s e nt e nc i ng r a nge e s t abl i s he d by the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes. ” H un er lach , 2 5 8 F . 3 d at1 2 8 7 . “ T h i s n o t i ce m u st spec i fi ca l l y i dent i fythe grou nd on w hi ch the di stri ctcourti s c on t em pl at i ng an up w ar d d eparture. ” I

d. ( i nt e rna l quot a t i ons om i tt e d) . T he m a xi m um f i ne f orthe in stan t o ff

en se w as $ 2 5 0 ,0 0 0 . 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 7 1 (b )( 3 ). A t th e tim e o f D u b o c’s o r ig in a l s e n te n c in g , § 5 E 1 .2 e s tab lis h e d th e g u id e lin e f in e r a n g e a s $ 1 7 ,5 0 0 to $ 175, 000 f

orthe i ns t a ntof

f e ns e . U . S . S . G . § 5E 1. 2( c ) ( 3) ( 1998) . S e c t i on 5E 1. 2( d) f u rth e rp r o v id e d th a t in d e te rm in in g th e a m o u n t o f th e f in e , th e c o u rt s h o u ld c ons i de r , a m ong othe rthi ngs , the ne e d f orthe c om bi ne d s e nt e nc e t o r e f l e c tthe s e r io u s n e s s o f

th e o f f e n s e , p r o m o te r e s p e c t f

o rth e la w , p r o v id e ju s t p u n is h m e n t,9

and afford adequat e det erre nce. U . S . S . G . § 5 E 1. 2(d). A dd i t i on al l y, the gu i del i nes i nstruct ed thatthe am ou ntof the fi ne shou l d “ ensure thatthe fi ne, t aken t og ether w i th o ther s anct i on s i m po se d, i s pun i t i ve. ” I d. I n i t s br i e f

, the gove rnm e ntc onc e de s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtvi ol a t e d B urns by f a i l i ng t o gi ve D uboc pr i ornot i c e . N e ve rthe l e s s , the c ourt ’ s f a i l ur e t o gi ve pr i or no t i ce w as no tpl ai nl y e rr on eous becaus e i ti s uncl ear w hether B urns , w hi ch addres se d an u pw ar d d eparture und era m andat ory gui del i ne sc hem e, st i l l appl i es a f t e rthe S upr e m e C ourt ’ s de c i s i on i n U ni ted Stat es v. B oo ke r , 543 U . S . 220, 125 S . C t . 73 8, 16 0 L . E d. 2d 62 1 (20 05 ). A dd i t i on al l y, D ub oc fa i l ed t o est abl i sh that hi s s ub st ant i al ri gh t s w er e a ff ec t ed si nce he offe re d n o i nd i ca t i on as t o h ow he w as pr e j udi c e d by the c ourt ’ s f a i l ur e t o gi ve hi m not i c e a nd doe s noti ndi c a t e tha the w oul d ha ve be e n abl e t o pr e s e nta ny e vi de nc e ora r gum e nt s i n oppos i t i on t o the f in e h a d h e b e e n g iv e n p r io rn o tic e . F u rth e rm o r e , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t p la in ly err by f ai l i ng t o m ake s peci fi c f i nd i ng s c on ce rni ng ea ch of the § 5 E 1. 2(d) fa ct ors be c aus e the r e c or d i n thi s c a s e pr ovi de s s uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e t o s upportac onc l us i on tha tthe f a c t or s w e r e c ons i de r e d i n i m pos i ng the f i ne . F i na l l y , the c ourtdi d not p la in ly e rrin s e ttin g D u b o c ’s f in e a t $ 2 5 0 ,0 0 0 . C o n s id e r in g th e f a c to r s lis te d in § 3553( a ) a nd § 5E 1. 2( d) , the c ourtc onc l ude d tha taf i ne above the gui de l i ne r a nge w a s j us t i f

i e d ba s e d on the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the i ns t a ntof

f e ns e a nd10

r e l a t e d c onduc t . A s ar e s ul tof the l a r ge s um s of

m one y i nvol ve d i n the i ns t a nt ca se , the courtdi d n otpl ai nl y e rri n con cl ud i ng thata f i ne of $ 2 50 , 00 0 w as appr opr i a t e . F urthe rm or e , i n l i ghtof D uboc ’ s hi s t ory of

hi di ng a s s e t s f

r om the g o v e rn m e n t, th e c o u rt d id n o t p la in ly e rrin d e te rm in in g th a t D u b o c h a d th e ab ility t o p aythe fi ne. L a s t, D u b o c a r g u e s th a t h is a tto rn e y w a s in e f f e c tiv e b e c au s e h e f

a ile d to obj ec tor ar gu e the i ss ues D ub oc i s pre se nt i ng on appeal . H e a ss ert s thatthe re cord i s a dequ at e f

or re vi ew of thi s i ss ue on di re ctappeal , and m ai nt ai ns thathe w as p r e ju d ic e d b y c o u n s e l’s p e r f o rm a n c e . W e ge ne r a l l y do notc ons i de rc l a i m s of i ne f f e c t i ve a s s i s t a nc e of

c ouns e l on di re ctappeal w hen the di stri ctcourtdi d n otent ert ai n the cl ai m or devel op a f ac tual r e c o r d . U

ni ted Stat es v. B ender , 2 9 0 F . 3 d 1 2 7 9 , 1 2 8 4 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 2 ). W e m ay, h o w e v e r , c o n s id e ra n in e f f e c tiv e a s s is ta n c e c la im w h e n th e r e c o r d is s u f f ic ie n tly d e v e lo p e d . I

d. ; se e a l so M assaro v. U

ni ted Stat es , 5 3 8 U .S . 5 0 0 , 5 0 8 , 1 2 3 S . C t. 16 90 , 16 96 , 15 5 L . E d. 2d 71 4 (20 03 ) ( re cogn i zi ng thati neff ec t i ve as si st ance cl ai m s do n othave t o b e r es erved for col l at er al re vi ew ). “ W hether acr i m i nal d e f e n d a n t’s tr ia l c o u n s e l w a s in e f f e c tiv e is am ix e d q u e s tio n o f la w a n d f

a c t, s ubj e c tt o de no vo re vi ew . ” B ender , 290 F . 3d a t1284. T o e s t abl i s h i ne f f e c t i ve as si st ance of coun se l , a def endantm ustshow that : (1) c ou nsel ’ s per form ance w as11

de f i c i e nt , w hi c h i s de f

i ne d a s r e pr e s e nt a t i on tha tf e l l be l ow a n obj e c t i ve reaso n ab l en ess st an d ard ; an d (2 ) th e d efi ci en tp erfo rm an ce p rej u d i cedth e d efen se b y s h o w in g th at th er e is a re as o n ab le p ro b ab il ity th at b u t fo r c o u n se l’ s u n p r o f e s s io n a l e rr o r , th e r e s u lt o f th e p r o c e e d in g w o u ld h a v e b e e n d if f e r e n t. U ni ted Stat es v. V

er bi t skaya , 4 0 6 F .3 d 1 3 2 4 , 1 3 3 7 - 1 3 3 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) , c e r t. deni ed , N o. 05 -698 (J an 9, 20 06 ). H er e, th e r ec o rd is n o t su ff icien tl y d ev elo p ed to co n sid erD u b o c’s i neff ec t i ve as si st ance cl ai m re l at ed t o cou nsel ’ s f ai l ure t o o bj ec tt o the di stri ct co u rt ’ s B urns v io la tio n a n d u p w a r d d e p a rtu r e f r o m th e g u id e lin e f

in e r a n g e . W e w ill, h o w e v e r , c o n s id e rD u b o c ’s in e f f e c tiv e a s s is ta n c e o f

c o u n s e l c la im r e la te d to hi s c ouns e l ’ s f

a i l ur e t o obj e c tora r gue tha tthe c ourts e nt e nc e d hi m unde rthe w r ong c r i m i na l s t a tut e , c a l c ul a t e d hi s s e nt e nc e i nc orr e c t l y , a nd s houl d ha ve im p o s e d ac o n c u rr e n t s e n te n c e b e c au s e th e r e c o r d is s u f f ic ie n tly d e v e lo p e d w ith r e ga r d t o the s e i s s ue s . A s i ndi c a t e d above , the di s tr i c tc ourts e nt e nc e d D uboc u n d e rth e c o rr e c t s ta tu te , c o rr e c tly c a lc u la te d h is s e n te n c e , a n d w a s n o t r e q u ir e d to i m po se a c on curr entse nt ence . A s are sul t , D ub oc ca nn otshow thatthe al l eged d e f ic ie n t p e r f

o rm a n c e o f

h is c o u n s e l p r e

ju d ic e d h im . F or the foregoi ng re as on s, w e a ff i rm D ub oc’ s s ent ence . AF F I RME D.