## United States Court of App eals

F O R T H E E I G H T H

C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 1- 27 47

__ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *

* App el le e, * App eal fro m th e Uni te d S ta te s
* Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e

v. * W es te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

* Jo nt ez T. Turn er, * [UNPUBLISHED]

* App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _
Su bm it te d: Marc h 1 2, 2 01 2 Fi le d: Marc h 1 9, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ _ Befo re WOL LMAN, BOW MAN, an d C OLLOTO N, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _
PER CURI AM.

Jo nt ez Turn er pl ead ed gu il ty to be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm , 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( g) (1 ) an d 92 4( a)(2 ), an d th e Dis tri ct Co ur t se nt en ced hi m t o f i f ty- 1

s ev en m on th s’ i m

pr is on m en t. In cal cu la ti ng Turn er’s se nt en ce, th e co ur t ap pl ie d a fo ur -l ev el en ha

nc em en t unde r U

. S. Se nte nc ing G uid el in es Man ua l § 2K2 .1(b )(6 ) aft er fin di ng th at Tu r n e r ’s po ss es si on of a lo ad ed pi st ol was in co nn ect io n wit h an ot he r fel on y of fen se , na m el y , po ss es si on of a us er qu an ti ty of co cai ne

. Turn er ap pe al s,
arg ui ng th at th e co ur t erre d i n a pp lying th e en ha nc em en t b ecau se th e ev id en ce was

The Hon or ab le Greg Kay s, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es t e r n 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.in su f

f i c i e n t to es ta bl is h th at hi s po ss es si on of th e fir earm faci li ta te d hi s po ss es si on of th e co cai ne . W e aff

irm.

We rev ie w fo r cl ear erro r a di st ric t co ur t’s fact ua l de te rm in at io n th at a de fen da nt po ss es se d a fir e a r m in co nn ect io n wit h an ot he r fel on y

. Uni te d St at es v. Sm it h
, 53 5 F.3 d 88 3, 88 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ). W he n th e ot he r fel on y of fen se is dr ug
po ss es si on , as op po se d to dr ug tra ffi ck in g , a di st ric t co ur t m ay ap pl y th e § 2K2 .1(b )(6 ) en ha nc em en t on ly aft er sp eci fic al ly fin di ng th at th e fir earm faci li ta te d

or ha d th e po te nt ia l to faci li ta te th e dr ug

- p o s se ss io n of fen se

. See Uni te d St at es v. F u e nt es Torr es , 52 9 F.3 d 82 5, 82 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ); U.S. Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s Man ua l § 2K2 .1 cm t. n.1 4( A). W e ha ve he ld th at th e en ha nc em en t ap pl ie s “ whe n a dr ug us er ch oo se s t o c arry his il le ga l d ru gs ou t i nt o p ub li c wit h a fir earm [be cau se ] th ere are m an y way s in whi ch th e weap on can faci li ta te th e dr u g o f f e n s e an d da ng ero us ly em

bo ld en th e of

fen de r.” Uni te d St at es v. Reg a n s , 1 2 5 F.3 d 68 5, 68 7 (8 th Ci r. 19 97 ), cert

. de ni ed
, 52 3 U.S

. 1 0 6 5 (1 99 8) ; se e al so Uni te d St at es v. Swan so n, 61 0 F.3 d 10 05
, 10 08 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (n ot in g th at a fir earm faci li ta te s or ha s th e po te nt ia l to faci li ta te dr ug po ss es si on “ whe n a de fen da nt co nc ur ren tl y po ss es se s dr ug s and a fi rear m

whi le in pu bl ic , li ke in a car” ). “ The in fere nc e th at a fi rear m is fo r pr ot ect io n of dr ug s is al lo wab le whe n th e am ou nt of dr ug s is m or e th an res id ue .” Swan so n, 6 10 F.3d at 1 00 8.

It was un di sp ut ed th at Turn er p os se ss ed a us er qu an ti ty of co cai ne —a felo ny of fen se un de r Mi ss ou ri la w—an d a fir earm lo ad ed wit h ei gh t ro un ds in th e m ag azi ne

an d on e ro un d in th e ch am be r. The Dis tri ct Co ur t sp eci fic al ly fo un d th at Tur n e r’s
p o s s e s s io n of th e lo ad ed fir earm “ faci li ta te d or ha d th e po te nt ia l to faci li ta te [ h i s ]
po ss es si on of th is us er am ou nt of c o c a i n e ,” no ti ng th at Turn er was “ in th e

co m m un it y ,” “ ou t an d ab ou t [wit h] a lo ad ed gu n wit h a

. . . l i v e ro un d in th e ch am be r” whi le al so in po ss es si on of dr ug s. Sen t. Tr. at 7. The Dis tri ct Co ur t di d no t cl earl y err in de te rm in in g th at Turn er’s po ss es si on of th e fir earm faci li ta te d or ha d th e
po te nt ia l to faci li ta te hi s po ss es si on of a us er qu an ti ty of co cai ne

. Turn er ha d th e

-2

-fir earm an d th e co cai ne in pu bl ic , wi th hi m in hi s car. The fi rear m an d th e co cai ne

were bo th wit hi n Turn er’s im m ed ia te reac h an d it was pe rm is si bl e fo r th e Dis tri ct Co ur t to in fer th at th e dr

ug s an d th e gu n were “ pu rp os efu ll y to ge th er an d n o t cl os e in pro xi m it y

si m pl y as a m at te r of

co in ci de nc e.” Swan so n, 6 10 F.3d at 1 00 8.

Bec au se th e Dis tri ct Co ur t m ad e th e fact ua l fi nd in gs req ui red for ap pl ic at io n of th e § 2K2 .1(b )(6 ) en ha nc em en t an d th os e fin di ng s are no t cl earl y e r r o n e o u s , we affi rm th e jud gm en t o f th e Dis tri ct Co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-