FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT SEPTEMBER 7, 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- 11575 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 0 0 0 9 5 - CR- T- 2 3 - TBM 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 E L I Z A B E T H P O W E L L G A T L I 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 M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 7, 2006) B e f o r e A N D E R S O N , B L A C K a n d B A R K E T T , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R I A M: E l i zabeth P ow el l G at l i n app ea l s herconv i ct i on s a nd se nt ence s f or three2

c o u n t s o f d i s tr i b u t i o n o f

me th a mp h e t a mi n e ( “ me th ” ) , i n v i o l a t i o n o f 2 1 U . S. C. § 841( a ) ( 1) , ( b) ( 1) ( C ) ; pos s e s s i on w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e 50 gr a m s orm or e of m e th, i n vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) , ( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( vi i i ) ; us i ng a nd c a rry i ng a f i r e a rm d u r i n g a n d i n r e l a t i o n t o ad ru g tr a f f i c k i n g c r i me , 1 8 U . S. C. § 924( c ) ( 1) ( A ) ; a nd pos s e s s i on of af i r e a rm by ac onvi c t e d f

e l on, i n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . §§ 92 2(g)(1), 92 4(a) (2). F i rs t , G at l i n chal l enges thatthere w as i nsuffi ci entevi dence t o sup po rther c onvi c t i on f

orpos s e s s i on w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e m e th. G a t l i n a r gue s tha tthe g o v e rn m e n t f

a ile d to p r o v e th a t s h e in te n d e d to d is tr ib u te th e 5 0 g r a m s o f m e th in her posse ss i on on the dat e of herarre st . G at l i n argues thatthe m eth fou nd i n h er pu rs e w as for herpers on al use, w hi ch w as consi st entw i th b oth D et ec t i ve Ja m es P rui tt ’ s t e s t i m ony , a s w e l l a s the t e s t i m ony of G a t l i n he r s e l f

. G a t l i n a r gue s tha tthe ju ry w a s le f

t to s p e c u la te a s to w h e th e rs h e in te n d e d to s e ll th e m e th in h e rp u r s e . G a tlin f u r th e ra r g u e s th a t th e r e w a s n o e v id e n c e s u p p o r tin g th e ju ry ’s s p e c if ic f in d in g th a t th is c o u n t o f c o n v ic tio n in v o lv e d 5 6 g r a m s o f m e th . S ec on d, G at l i n chal l enges thatthere w as i nsuffi ci entevi dence t o sup po rther c onvi c t i on f

orus i ng a nd c a rry i ng af i r e a rm dur i ng a nd i n r e l a t i on t o adrug tr a f f i c ki ng c r i m e . G a t l i n a r gue s tha the rpos s e s s i on of af i r e a rm w a s a c c i de nt a l or c oi nc i de nt a l t o the c om m i s s i on of the drug f

e l ony . G a t l i n c ont e nds tha tD e t e c t i ve3

P rui tt ’ s t es t i m on y dem on stra t es thatshe had the gu n for prot ec t i on because s he had b e e n r o b b e d th e m o rn in g o f th e d a te o f

h e ra rr e s t. T hi rd, G at l i n chal l enges that18 U . S . C . § 9 24 (c ) a nd 18 U . S . C . § 9 22 (g) a re bo th fac i al l y uncon st i tut i on al un der the C om m er ce C l ause and u ncon st i tut i on al as appl i e d t o he r . G a t l i n a r gue s tha t§ 922 e xc e e ds C ongr e s s ’ s pow e runde rthe C om m e r c e C l a us e be c a us e the s t a tut e r e qui r e s tha tthe gun a f f e c tc om m e r c e , but d o es n o tsp eci fy th ati tm u staffect i n t erst at e o r fo rei g n co m m erce. G at l i n al so a r gue s tha tthe s t a tut e i s unc ons t i tut i ona l be c a us e i tdoe s notr e qui r e tha tthe po ss es si on of a f

i re arm “ subst ant i al l y” af fe ctcom m er ce . G at l i n ackno w l edges that her a rgum enthas pre vi ou sl y bee n rej ec t ed by thi s C ou rt . G at l i n al so ar gu es that the of f e ns e unde r§ 924( c ) of

pos s e s s i ng orus i ng af i r e a rm i n the c om m i s s i on of another f eder al cr i m e has no i nh er entre l at i on shi p t o i nt er st at e c om m er ce and n ot es th a t § 9 2 4 ( c ) c o n ta in s n o e x p lic it ju r is d ic tio n a l e le m e n t th a t lim its its ap p lic a tio n to i nt er st at e c om m er ce . G at l i n further c hal l enges that§ 9 24 (c ) i s uncon st i tut i on al as appl i ed t o h erbecause the go vernm entoffe re d n o evi dence s ho w i ng thather cond uctaf

fe ct ed i nt er st at e c om m er ce or had a subst ant i al ef fe cton com m er ce . G at l i n argues thatthe fa ctthatthe fi re arm w as m anufactured i n ano ther s t at e has n o b e a r in g o n th e o v e r a ll r e g u la tio n o f f ir e a rm s o rth e s a le o f

f ir e a rm s . F our th, G a t l i n c ha l l e nge s tha tthe e nha nc e m e ntof the m a nda t ory m i ni m um4

s e nt e nc e f

orpos s e s s i on w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e m e th ba s e d on pr i orc onvi c t i ons n o t a lle g e d in th e in d ic tm e n t o rf o u n d b y th e ju ry v io la te d h e rF if th a n d S ix th A m e ndm e ntr i ght s . G a t l i n a l s o a r gue s tha ts he s houl d be s e nt e nc e d unde rthe m andat ory gui del i nes bec ause her off ense w as com m i tt ed and i nd i ctm entw as i s s ue d pr i ort o U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . 220, 125 S . C t . 738, 756, 160 L . E d. 2d 62 1 (20 05 ). G at l i n al so chal l enges thatthe enhancem entof a s t atut ory mi n i mu m b a s e d o n j u d i c i a l f a c tf i n d i n g s s h o u l d b e s u b

j e c tt o th e s a me c o n s titu tio n a l m a n d a te s a s th o s e w h ic h r a is e th e m a x im u m s e n te n c e . G a tlin c o n c e d e s , h o w e v e r , th a t a ll o f th e s e a r g u m e n ts a r e f

o r e c lo s e db y p r e c e d e n t. F i na l l y , G a t l i n c ha l l e nge s tha tthe e nha nc e m e ntt o the m a nda t ory m i ni m um p e n a lty f o rth e c o n v ic tio n f

o ru s in g a n d c a rry in g af ir e a rm d u r in g a n d in r e la tio n to ad ru g tr a f

f ic k in g c r im e b a s e d o n th e f ir e a rm b e in g d is c h a r g e d is u n c o n s titu tio n a l. G a t l i n a r gue s tha tthe que s t i on of w he the rthe f

i r e a rm w a s di s c ha r ge d s houl d be pa r tof the of f e ns e a nd c ha r ge d i n the i ndi c tm e ntbe c a us e i te l e va t e s the m i ni m um s e n t e n c e . G a t l i n c o n c e d e s , h o w e v e r , th a tth i s a r g u me n ti s f o r e c l o s e d b y Su p r e me C o u r t p r e c e d e n t. I. W e ge ne r a l l y r e vi e w “ the s uf f i c i e nc y of

the e vi de nc e de novo, vi e w i ng the e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to th e g o v e rn m e n t a n d d r a w in g a ll r e a s o n ab le5

i nf e r e nc e s i n f

a vorof the j ury ' s ve r di c t . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a s tr o, 89 F . 3d 1443, 1 4 5 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ) . D e te rm in a tio n s o f th e c r e d ib ility o f

w itn e s s e s f

a ll w ith in th e e x c lu s iv e p r o v in c e o f th e ju ry a n d m a y n o t b e r e v is ite d u n le s s th e te s tim o n y is

“ i nc r e di bl e a s am a tt e rof l a w . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a l de r on, 127 F . 3d 1314, 1325 (1 1 th C i r. 1 9 9 7 ). In o rd er t o b e i n cred i b l e as a m att er o f l aw , th e t est i m o n y “ m u st be unbe l i e vabl e on i t s f a c e . ” I d. I n o r d e rto c o n v ic t G a tlin o f p o s s e s s io n w ith th e in te n t to d is tr ib u te m etham ph et am i ne, the go vernm enthad t o est abl i sh three el em ent s: (1) kno w l edge; ( 2) pos s e s s i on; a nd ( 3) i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. G a m boa , 166 F . 3d 1327, 1331 ( 11th C i r . 1999) . T he i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e m a y be i nf e rr e d f r om the a m o u n t o f

d ru g s in v o lv e d . U n ite d S ta te s v . H e rn a n d e z , 4 3 3 F .3 d 1 3 2 8 , 1 3 3 3 ( 1 1 th C i r. 20 05 ), ce rt . deni ed, 12 6 S . C t . 16 35 (200 6). V i e w i ng the e vi de nc e i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o the gove rnm e nta nd m a k in g a ll r e a s o n ab le in f e r e n c e s in f

a v o ro f th e ju ry ’s v e r d ic t, th e e v id e n c e is s u f f ic ie n t to s u p p o r t th e ju ry ’s f in d in g th a t G a tlin h a d th e in te n t to d is tr ib u te m e th . D e t e c t i ve P rui ttt e s t i f

i e d tha ti n hi s e xpe r i e nc e tha tm e th us e r s ty pi c a l l y onl y buy s m a lle ra m o u n ts o f

m e th s u c h a s o n e - s ix te e n th o ro n e - e ig h th a n o u n c e , a n d r a r e ly buy a s m uc h a s aha l f

- ounc e . B a s e d on thi s t e s t i m ony , the j ury m a y ha ve di sbel i eved G at l i n’ s t es t i m on y thatshe use d b etw ee n o ne-quart erand o ne-hal f a nGatlin doe s n ot a rguethat her te stimo ny sh ould b edis re g arde d f or su ff ic iency purp os e s, 1 c .f . Wil liams, 39 0 F .3 d at 13 25 (C or ri g an, J., c on cur

ring), and in f

a c t re lie s o n h er te stimony a s w e ll. 6 ou nce, and con cl ud ed thatthe tw o o un ce s of m eth i n h erpu rs e w as m ore than an a m ountf orpe r s ona l us e . T he j ury m a y ha ve a l s o i nf e rr e d G a t l i n’ s i nt e ntt o s e l l the m e th in h e rp u r s e f

r o m h e ra d m is s io n th a t s h e s o ld m e th a n d th e f a c t th a t s h e s o ld d ru g s to D etec ti v e P ru itt m u lt ip le ti m es . A lso , th e ju ry m ay h av e in fe rr ed G atli n ’s i nt entt o sel l the m eth i n h erpu rs e bas ed on her ow n t es t i m on y thatshe w as u n e m p lo y e d a n d s u p p o r te d h e ro w n h ab it b y s e llin g m e th . T h e f a c t th a t G a tlin h a d th e o p p o rtu n ity to s e ll tw o m o r e o u n c e s o f m e th to D et ec t i ve P rui tton the dat e of herarre stand ref used supp ort s hert es t i m on y that the m e th i n he rpur s e w a s f orhe row n pe r s ona l us e . T he j ury , how e ve r , m a y ha ve c onc l ude d tha tG a t l i n w a s s a vi ng tha tm e th f ora nothe rc us t om e r , a s D e t e c t i ve P rui ttt e s t i f

i e d. T he j ury a l s o m a y ha ve i nf e rr e d G a t l i n’ s i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e f r om her t es t i m on y thatshe i nt ended t o sm ok e the m eth i n h erpu rs e, bu t“ [i ] f [ she] needed a l i tt l e bi tof ca sh, [s he] w as go i ng t o g etri d o f al i tt l e bi tof i t . ” T he j ury m ayhave al so di sbel i eved G at l i n’ s t es t i m on y a nd used her t es t i m on y a s e vi dence of he rgui l t . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. W i l l i a m s , 390 F . 3d 1319, 1326 ( 11th C i r . 2004) ( “W h e r e s o m e c o rr o b o r a tiv e e v id e n c e o f g u ilt e x is ts f

o rth e c h a r g e d o f

f e n s e . . . an d th e d efen d an tt ak es th e st an d i n h er o w n d efen se, th e D efen d an t ' s t est i m o n y, de ny i ng gui l t , m a y e s t abl i s h, by i t s e l f , e l e m e nt s of

the of f e ns e ” ) . A l though

17

G a tlin ’s a r g u m e n t w o u ld p r o v id e ar e a s o n ab le b a s is f o ra n a c q u itta l o n th is c o u n t, there w as suff

i ci entevi dence t o sup po rta r ea sonabl e i nfer ence t o the contra rythat G a t l i n di d i nt e nd t o di s tr i but e the m e th. T he r e f or e , the c onvi c t i on on thi s c ount w a s s u p p o r te d b y s u f

f ic ie n t e v id e n c e . F i na l l y , i ti s unc l e a rhow the j ury s pe c i f i c a l l y f ound tha tG a t l i n pos s e s s e d 56 gram s of m eth w i th the i nt entt o d i stri bu t e i t . Iti s possi bl e thatthe j ury c on fuse d the a m ountof

m e th i n G a t l i n’ s pur s e w i th D e t e c t i ve D a vi d W a l l a c e ’ s t e s t i m ony thathe di sc ov er ed 55 . 9 g ra m s of m ar i j uana i n G at l i n’ s bedroom . T he evi dence, ho w ever , do es supp orta f i nd i ng thatG at l i n p osse ss ed 66 gram s of m eth i n h er pur s e . T he j ury m a y ha ve f ound tha tG a t l i n onl y i nt e nde d t o s e l l 56 gr a m s of the m e th a n d to k e e p th e o th e r1 0 g r a m s . B e c a u s e th e e v id e n c e in th e r e c o r d a c tu a lly s uppor t s af

i ndi ng of agr e a t e ra m ountof

m e th, a nd the di f

f e r e nc e be tw e e n 56 g r a m s a n d 6 6 g r a m s o f

m e th w o u ld n o t a f

f e c t G a tlin ’s s e n te n c e , th e ju ry ’s s p e c if ic f in d in g is s u p p o r te d b y s u f f ic ie n t e v id e n c e .

II. P ur s ua ntt o 18 U . S . C . § 924( c ) ( 1) ( A ) , i ti s i l l e ga l f or“ a ny pe r s on w ho, dur i ng a nd i n r e l a t i on t o a ny . . . drug tr a f f i c ki ng c r i m e . . . f

orw hi c h the pe r s on m a y b e p r o s e c u te d in ac o u r t o f th e U n ite d S ta te s , [ to ] u s e [ ] o rc a rr [ y ] a f ir e a rm . . .

. ” 18 U . S . C . § 924( c ) ( 1) ( A ) . T o s us t a i n ac onvi c t i on unde rthi s s t a tut e , the8

gove rnm e ntm us tha ve s uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e on both the “ us e s orc a rr i e s ” pr ong a nd the “ dur i ng a nd i n r e l a t i on t o” pr ong. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. T i m m ons , 283 F . 3d 1246, 1250 ( 11th C i r . 2002) . T he phr a s e “ i n r e l a t i on t o” m e a ns tha t , a tam i ni m um , “ the f i r e a rm m us tha ve s om e purpos e ore f f e c tw i th r e s pe c tt o the drug tr a f f i c ki ng cr i m e; i t s pre se nce or i nv ol vem entca nn otbe the re sul tof ac ci dentor coi nci dence. ” S m i th v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 508 U . S . 223, 238, 113 S . C t . 2050, 2059, 124 L . E d. 2d 138 ( 1993) . T he f

i r e a rm a tl e a s tm us tf

a c i l i t a t e , orha ve the pot e nt i a l of f a c i l i t a t i ng the drug tr a f f i c ki ng of f e ns e . I d. T he e vi de nc e he r e w a s s uf f i c i e ntf orthe j ury t o f

i nd tha tG a t l i n us e d or c a rr i e d af

i r e a rm dur i ng a nd i n r e l a t i on t o adrug tr a f f i c ki ng of f e ns e . D e t e c t i ve P rui ttt es t i fi ed thatm ostof the drug tra nsac t i on s w i th G at l i n o cc urre d i n h er be dr oom , a nd G a t l i n t e s t i f i e d tha ts he us ua l l y s ol d m e th f r om he rbe dr oom . T he e vi de nc e a l s o r e f

l e c t e d tha tG a t l i n pl a c e d the gun unde rthe pi l l ow on he rbe d. T he evi dence further r ef

l ec t ed thatG at l i n fi re d the gu n tw i ce i n h erbedroo m as offi ce rs ent er ed her hom e. T he st ori ng and fi ri ng of the gu n sup po rt s aj ury i nfer ence that s he w a s “ us i ng” or“ c a rry i ng” the gun. F ur the rm or e , the f a c ttha ts he ha d the gun st ored i n the pl ac e w here she gener al l y s ol d m eth sup po rt s the j ury’ s i nfer ence that s h e p o s s e s s e d th e g u n d u r in g a n d in r e la tio n to th e c r im e o f p o s s e s s in g m e th w ith the i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e i t . T he j ury m a y ha ve i nf e rr e d tha ts he s t a r t e d f

i r i ng the gun9

w hen the po l i ce ca m e t o sea rc h h erho m e bec ause she tho ug htsom eone w as co m i n g t o st eal h er d ru g s. A l th o u g h G at l i n cl ai m s th atsh e h ad th e g u n b ecau se she f ea re d thatpeop l e w er e c om i ng t o att ac k h er , the j ury m ayhave di sbel i eved her t e s t i m ony a nd us e d i ta s s ubs t a nt i ve e vi de nc e of he rgui l t , a l ong w i th the gove rnm e nt ’ s e vi de nc e . T he r e f or e , the j ury ’ s f

i ndi ng tha tG a t l i n us e d orc a rr i e d a f i r e a rm dur i ng a nd i n r e l a t i on t o adrug tr a f f i c ki ng of f e ns e i s s uppor t e d by s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . III. W e r e vi e w de novo G a t l i n’ s pr e s e rve d c ha l l e nge t o § 922( g) unde rthe C o m m e r c e C la u s e . U n ite d S ta te s v . D u n n , 3 4 5 F .3 d 1 2 8 5 , 1 2 8 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . W e r e v ie w G a tlin ’s c h a lle n g e u n d e rth e C o m m e r c e C la u s e to § 9 2 4 ( c ) f o rp la in e rr orbe c a us e i ti s r a i s e d f orthe f i r s tt i m e on appe a l . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. P e t e r s , 403 F . 3d 1263, 1270 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . T o e s t abl i s h pl a i n e rr or , ade f e nda ntm us ts how there i s ( 1) error, (2) thati s pl ai n, and (3) thataf fe ct s s ub st ant i al ri gh t s. U ni t ed S ta te s v . O la n o , 5 0 7 U .S . 7 2 5 , 1 1 3 S .C t. 1 7 7 0 , 1 7 7 6 , 1 2 3 L .E d .2 d 5 0 8 ( 1 9 9 3 ) . I f a ll thr e e c ondi t i ons a r e m e t , w e m a y onl y r e ve r s e i f the e rr or“ s e r i ous l y a f

f e c t [ s ] the fa i rnes s, i nt egri ty or pub l i c r eput at i on of j ud i ci al proceedi ng s. ” I d. (i nt ernal qu ot at i on s om i tt ed). W e have re peat edl y uph el d the const i tut i on al i ty of § 92 2(g). U ni t ed S t at es10

v. W r i ght , 392 F . 3d 1269, 1280 ( 11th C i r . 2004) , c e r t . de ni e d, 125 S . C t . 1751 ( 2005) ; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D unn, 345 F . 3d a t1297; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S c ott , 263 F . 3d 12 70 (11th C i r. 20 01 ); U ni t ed S t at es v. D up re e, 25 8 F . 3d 12 58 (11th C i r. 20 01 ); U ni t e d S t a t e s v. N i c hol s , 124 F . 3d 1265, 1266 ( 11th C i r . 1997) ; M c A l l i s t e r , 77 F .3 d a t 3 9 0 . I n N ic h o ls , w e r e je c te d a n id e n tic a l c o n s titu tio n a l c h a lle n g e to § 922( g) be c a us e the t e rm “ c om m e r c e ” i s notde f i ne d a s “ i nt e r s t a t e orf

or e i gn com m er ce . ” N i chol s, 12 4 F . 3d at12 66 . T hu s, w e s i m i l ar l y r ej ec tG at l i n’ s f ac i al c h a lle n g e to th e c o n s titu tio n a lity o f § 9 2 2 ( g ) . W e have al so up hel d the const i tut i on al i ty of § 92 4(c) agai nstC om m er ce C l ause chal l enges. U ni t ed S t at es v. F erre i ra , 27 5 F . 3d 10 20 , 10 28 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 1 ) ; U n ite d S ta te s v . D e P a c e , 1 2 0 F .3 d 2 3 3 , 2 3 5 n . 2 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 7 ) . W e s im ila r lyd e n y G a tlin ’s c h a lle n g e h e r e . F in a lly , G a tlin a r g u e s th a t § 9 2 4 ( c ) is u n c o n s titu tio n a l a s ap p lie d to h e r . S e c tio n 9 2 4 ( c ) o n ly r e q u ir e s th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t p r o v e s o m e “m in im a l n e x u s ” to i nt er st at e c om m er ce . S cott , 26 3 F . 3d at12 74 . A gentM i chae l G i st i ng ert es t i fi ed tha tthe f r a m e orr e c e i ve rof

G a t l i n’ s f

i r e a rm w a s m a nuf

a c tur e d i n C a l i f

orni aa nd cr osse d st at e l i nes t o g eti nt o F l ori da. U nd erfe dera l l aw , the defi ni t i on of a f i r e a rm i nc l ude s the f

r a m e orr e c e i ve r . 18 U . S . C . § 921( a ) ( 3) ( C ) . A ge nt G is tin g e r ’s te s tim o n yth a t th e f r a m e o rr e c e iv e rw a s m a n u f a c tu r e d in C a lif

o rn ia11

a n d c r o s s e d s ta te lin e s in to F lo r id ais s u f f ic ie n t to e s tab lis h th e m in im a l n e x u s to in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e . T h e r e f o r e , w e r e

je c t G a tlin ’s c h a lle n g e th a t § 9 2 4 ( c ) is u n c o n s titu tio n a l a s ap p lie d to h e r . I V. W e r e vi e w de novo c ons t i tut i ona l c ha l l e nge s t o as e nt e nc e . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a nt e l l a no, 430 F . 3d 1142, 1144 ( 11th C i r . 2005) , c e r t . de ni e d, 126 S . C t . 1604 ( 2 0 0 6 ) . I n A l m e nda r e z - T orr e s v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 523 U . S . 224, 118 S . C t . 1219, 140 L . E d. 2d 350 ( 1998) , the S upr e m e C our the l d tha tthe gove rnm e ntne e d nota l l e ge i n i t s i ndi c tm e nt , a nd ne e d notpr ove be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubt , tha tade f e nda nt h a d p r io rc o n v ic tio n s in o r d e rf o rad is tr ic t c o u r t to u s e th o s e c o n v ic tio n s to e nha nc e as e nt e nc e . I d. a t247, 118 S . C t . a t1233. W e ha ve c l a r i f i e d tha tthe S upr e m e C our t ' s de c i s i on i n A l m e nda r e z - T orr e s w a s l e f tundi s turbe d by A ppr e ndi v. N e w J e r s e y , 530 U . S . 466, 120 S . C t . 2348, 147 L . E d. 2d 435 ( 2000) , B l a ke l y v. W a s h in g to n , 5 4 2 U .S . 2 9 6 , 1 2 4 S .C t. 2 5 3 1 , 1 5 9 L .E d .2 d 4 0 3 ( 2 0 0 4 ) , a n d B o o k e r . Un i t e d S t a t e s v . S h e l t o n , 4 0 0 F . 3 d 1 3 2 5 , 1 3 2 9 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) . Mo r e o v e r , we have no t ed thatw hi l e r ec entdeci si on s m ayar gu abl y c as tdo ub ton the future prospect s of A l m endarez -T orre s, the S up re m e C ou rthas notexpl i ci t l y overrul ed12

A l m e nda r e z - T orr e s , a nd, a s ar e s ul t , w e m us tf ol l ow i t . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a m a c h o - I b a r q u e n , 4 1 0 F .3 d 1 3 0 7 , 1 3 1 6 n .3 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , c e r t. d e n ie d , 1 2 6 S .C t. 45 7 (20 05 ). T hu s, w e r ej ec tG at l i n’ s a rgum entthatthe di stri ctcourtvi ol at ed her F i fth A m endm entand S i xth A m endm entri gh t s by e nh anci ng her s ent ence base d on pri or conv i ct i on s thatw er e notchar ged i n the i nd i ctm entor prov en t o the j ury b eyo n d a reaso n ab l e d o u b t , p art i cu l arl y w h ere, as h ere, th e facto f th o se conv i ct i on s w as no tchal l enged and , thu s, w as adm i tt ed. S ee S hel t on , 40 0 F . 3d at 1 3 3 0 . W e h a v e a ls o r e

je c te d th e id e ath a t ac o u r t m a y s p lic e B o o k e r ’s S ix th A m endm entho l di ng fr om the re m edi al ho l di ng and app l y onl y partof B oo ker r e tr o a c tiv e ly . U n ite d S ta te s v . D u n c a n , 4 0 0 F .3 d 1 2 9 7 , 1 3 0 3 - 0 4 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , c e r t. de ni e d, 126 S . C t . 432 ( 2005) . F ur the rm or e , w e r e j e c t e d the a r gum e nttha tthe ap p l i c a t i o n o f

th e Bo o k e rr e me d i a l h o l d i n g wo u l dv i o l a t e d u e p r o c e s s o rth e Ex P os tF a c t o C l a us e be c a us e i tw oul d e f f e c t i ve l y i nc r e a s e the s e nt e nc e a uthor i z e d by th e ju ry v e r d ic t f

r o m th e g u id e lin e r a n g e to th e s ta tu to ry m a x im u m . I d . a t 1 3 0 7 - 0 8 . A s s he concedes, G at l i n’ s a rgum enti s c on trol l ed by D un ca n, and w e there fore r e je c t it. F in ally, th e S u p re m e C o u rt h as d isti n g u ish ed fa cts th at ra ise a d ef en d an t’ s m a x im u m s e n te n c e f

r o m th o s e r a is in g ad e f

e n d a n t’s m in im u m s e n te n c e a n d h e ld13

thatfa ct s i ncre as i ng a m i ni m um se nt ence ar e notsubj ec tt o the const i tut i on al r e s tr i c t i ons i n the A ppr e ndi l i ne of c a s e s . H a rr i s v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 536 U . S . 545, 5 5 7 , 1 2 2 S .C t. 2 4 0 6 , 2 4 1 4 , 1 5 3 L .E d .2 d 5 2 4 (2 0 0 2 ). T h u s, w e d en y G atli n ’s const i tut i on al chal l enge t o the enhancem entof the st atut ory m i ni m um se nt ence b a s e d o n p r io rc o n v ic tio n s . V. W e r e vi e w de novo c ons t i tut i ona l c ha l l e nge s t o as e nt e nc e . C a nt e l l a no, 430 F .3 d a t 1 1 4 4 . P u r s u a n t to 1 8 U .S .C . § 9 2 4 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : [ A ] ny pe r s on w ho, dur i ng a nd i n r e l a t i on t o a ny c r i m e of vi ol e nc e or d ru g tr a f f ic k in g c r im e . . . f

o rw h ic h th e p e r s o n m a y b e p r o s e c u te d in ac o u r t o f

th e U n ite d S ta te s , u s e s o rc a rr ie s af ir e a rm , o rw h o , in f ur the r a nc e of

a ny s uc h c r i m e , pos s e s s e s af i r e a rm , s ha l l , i n a ddi t i on t o the puni s hm e ntpr ovi de d f ors uc h c r i m e of

vi ol e nc e ordrug tr a f f ic k in g c r im e . . . (i ) b e sen t en ced t o a t erm o f i m p ri so n m en to f n o tl ess th an 5 years;

. . . ( i i i ) i f the f i r e a rm i s di s c ha r ge d, be s e nt e nc e d t o at e rm of i m p ri so n m en to f n o tl ess th an 1 0 years. 18 U . S . C . § 9 24 (c )( 1)(A ). T he S upr e m e C our tha s he l d tha t§ 924( c ) ( 1) ( A ) de f i ne s as i ngl e of

f e ns e a nd r e ga r ds di s c ha r gi ng af

i r e a rm a s as e nt e nc i ng f a c t ort o be f

ound by the j udge , not14

an offens e e l em entt o b e f ou nd by the j ury. H arri s, 53 U . S . at55 6, 12 2 S . C t . at 24 14 . F urtherm ore, as no t ed abov e, the S up re m e C ou rtal so hel d i n H arri s that fa ct s i ncre as i ng a m i ni m um se nt ence ar e notsubj ec tt o the const i tut i on al r e s tr i c t i o n s i n th e Ap p r e n d i l i n e o f c a s e s . I d . a t5 5 7 , 1 2 2 S . C t . a t2 4 1 4 . T h u s , we r e j e c tG a t l i n’ s a r gum e nttha tthe 120- m onth m a nda t ory m i ni m um s e nt e nc e f or u s in g a n d c a rry in g af

ir e a rm d u r in g a n d in r e la tio n to ad ru g tr a f f ic k in g c r im e is unc ons t i tut i ona l be c a us e i tw a s ba s e d on f a c t s nota l l e ge d i n the i ndi c tm e ntor f o u n d b y th e ju ry . T h e ju d g m e n t o f

th e d is tr ic t c o u r t is AF F I RME D.