FI LED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEV ENT H CI RCUI T OCT OBER 6, 2 009 T HOMAS K . KAHN CLERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 9- 11 06 1 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 0 8- 00 30 7- CR-J HH-HGD UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us WAYNE LA MONT RIVERS, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ern Dis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Oct ob er 6 , 20 09 ) Befo re BI RCH, BLACK an d B ARKETT, Circu itJu dg es .PER CURI AM:

W ayne Lam on t Ri ve rs ap pe al s h is co nv ic ti on an d s en te nc e fo r po ss es si on of a fi rearm as aco nv ic te d fe lo n i n v io la ti on of 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 2( g) (1 ). Riv ers fir st arg ue s t ha t the go ve rn m en t b reac he d h is pl ea ag reem en t b y fai li ng to reco m

m en d anad jus tm en t fo r acc ep ta nc e o f res po ns ib il it y un de r Uni te d S ta te s Se nt en ci ng Gui de li ne (“ U.S.S.G.”) § 3 E1.1 . Seco nd , Riv ers co nt en ds th atth e d is tri ctco urt erro ne ou sl y

in crea se d h is off

en se lev el un de r U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 (b )(1 )(A) b as edon a fi nd in g t ha t the off

en se in vo lv edth ree fi rearm s. We AFFIRM fo r th e fo ll owi ng reas on s. I. BACKG ROUND Ri ve rs st ip ul at edin hi s wri tt enpl ea ag reem en t tha t the fol lo win g fa ct s wer e co rrec t. A po li ce o ffi cer s to pp edRiv ers forsp eed in g i n J anua ry 20 08 . Ins id e th e ve hi cl e, th e o ffi cer d is co ve reda lo ad edGlo ck.35 7 c al ib er p is to l an d a Mas te rp ie ce Arm s .4 5 c al ib er p is to l wi th a fl as h s up pr es so r. Riv ers als o s ti pu la te d th athe ha d a19 99 fed eral fel on y co nv ic ti on forco ns pi racy to p os se ss with t he in te ntto di st rib ut e co cai ne an d p os se ss io n wi th th e in te ntto di st rib ut e co cai ne . As p artof t he pl ea ag reem en t, the go ve rn m en t ag reedto reco m m en d areduc ti on in Ri ve rs ’ of

fen se lev el for

acce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il it y .

2Acco rd in g t o apre se nt en ce i nv es ti ga ti on rep ort (P SI), Ri ve rs ’ ba se off en se le ve l o f 26 was s ub

ject t o atwo -le ve l i nc reas e u nd er U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 (b )(1 )(A) be cau se th e o ffen se in vo lv edth ree f ire arm s –a Glo ck.35 7 c al ib er p is to l, a Mas te rp ie ce Arm s .4 5 c al ib er p is to l, an d a.45 cal ib er fl as h s up pr es so r (s il en cer) . The PSI d idno t re co m

m en d a n a dju st m en t fo r acc ep ta nc e o f res po ns ib il it y be cau se Riv ers de ni edto th e p ro ba ti on off ic er tha t h e kno win gl y

po ss es se d any fir earm s. In st ead , Riv ers to ldth e p ro ba ti on off ic er tha t h e was dri vi ng hi s br ot he r’s car a ndwas u na ware t ha t an y fir earm s wer e in si de . Riv ers furth er in di cat edth athe on ly ple d g ui lt y to en d t he cas e. Ri ve rs ob jecte d t o t he PSI o n t hr ee g ro un ds . Firs t, h e co nt en de d t ha t h e was en ti tl edto a th ree- po in t re du ct io n i n h is off en se lev el foracce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il it y

ba se d o n h is en try of a g ui lt y pl ea. Sec on d, h e arg ue d t ha t a twole ve l i nc reas e fo r th e p os se ss io n o f th ree fi rearm s was un warra nt edbe cau se th e .45 cal ib er fl as h s up pr es so r was pa rt o f th e .45 cal ib er p is to l. Thi rd , Riv ers co nt es te d h is cri m in al hi st ory cal cu la ti on ba se d o n h is pri orco nv ic ti on for carry in g api st ol witho uta li cen se . The di stric t co urt o ve rru le d a ll of R iv ers ’ ob jecti on s t o t he PSI atsen te nc in g an d fo un d t ha t the PSI’s fac tu al st at em en ts an d g ui de li ne co m pu ta ti on s wer e accu rat e. Co ntrary to t he pl ea ag reem en t, the go ve rn m en t d idno t re co m m en d a 3do wnwar d a dju st m en t fo r acc ep ta nc e o f res po ns ib il it y . After c on si de rin g t he

fact or s s etforth in 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a), the co urt s en te nc edRiv ers to th e lo w-en d ran ge of h is gu id el in es sen te nc e, 11 0 m on th s o f im pr is on m en t, an d t hr ee years o f supe rv is edrel eas e. II . DISCUSSI ON A. Breac h o f th e Pl ea Ag reem en t Ri ve rs see ks to withd raw h is gu il ty ple a b as edon th e g ov ern m en t’s fa il ur e to ke ep it s p ro m is e to reco m m en d areduc ti onforacce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il it y . 1 He as se rts th athe wou ldno t h av e p le d g ui lt y witho utth is in du cem en t an d t ha t the br each cau se d h im

pre jud ic e b y subjec ti ng hi m

to a hi gh er s en te nc in g g ui de li ne ran ge . Bec au se Riv ers di d n otch al le ng e th e g ov ern m en t’s b reac h o f a p le a ag reem en t b efo re the di st ric t co urt, we re vi ew fo r pl ai n e rro r. See Pu ck ett v . Uni te d S ta te s, 5 56 U.S. __ _, _

__ , 12 9 S . Ct. 1 42 3, 1 42 8 (2 00 9) ; Un it edSta te s v . De La Garza , 51 6 F .3d12 66 , 12 69 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ). Thi s re qu ire s t he ex is te nc e o f

“ (1 ) anerro r, (2 ) th atis pl ai n, (3 ) th ataffec ts th e d efen da nt ’s subs ta nt ia l ri gh ts , A two-leve l decr ease in the offe nse leve l is warra nted if the de fenda

nt “clea rly 1 demonstrates a cceptance of re sponsibili ty for his off

ense.” U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a). Athree -leve l decr ease is appropriate if the de fenda nt qualifies for a

decr ease under subse ction (a) , the offe nse level prior to a

pplication of subsec tion (a) is leve l 16 or grea ter, a nd the g overnme nt affir

ms that the def endant ha s assisted authorities in the investig ation or prose cution of his own misconduct by timely notifying a

uthorities of his intention to enter a guilty plea. See id. § 3E1.1(b). 4an d (4 ) th atser io us ly affect s t he fai rn es s, i nt eg rit y , or p ub li c rep ut at io n o f jud ic ia l

pr oc eed in gs .” De La Garza, 5 16 F.3dat 1 26 9. A d efen da nt ’s subs ta nt ia l ri gh ts are a ffec te d i f th e err or

“ affe ct edth e o ut co m e o f th e d is tri ctco urt p ro ceed in gs .” Pu ck et t, 5 56 U.S. at _

__ , 12 9 S . Ct. at14 29 (qu ot at io n m ark s an d c it at io n om it te d) . Whe re the affe ct edrig ht s re la te to sen te nc in g, “ th e ‘ou tc om e’ he m us t sh ow t o h av e b een affe ct edis hi s s en te nc e.” Id . at _

__ , 12 9 S . Ct. at14 33 n.4 . (quo ta ti onm ark s an d c it at io n o m it te d) . “ [A] defen da ntwho se pl ea ag reem en t h as be enbro ke n b y

th e Gov ern m en t wi ll no t al way s b e ab le to sh ow p reju di ce, ei th er be cau se he ob ta in edth e b en efi ts co nt em pl at edby the de al an y

way . . . orbe cau se he li ke ly w ou ldno t h av e o bt ai ne d t ho se be ne fit s i n a ny even t . . . .” Id. at__ _, 12 9 S . Ct. at14 32 -3 3. The lat te r si tu at io n app li es he re. The go ve rn m en t co nc ed es th atanerro r cl earl y oc cu rredwhenitbre ach edth e p le a ag reem en t b y no t re co m

m en di ng a reduc ti on foracce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il ity . Non ethe le ss , no pre jud ic e can be sh own be cau se Riv ers “ li ke ly w ou ldno t h av e o bt ai ne d t ho se be ne fit s i n a ny even t

. . . . ” Id . The d is tri ctco urt wo ul d n otha ve be enob li ga te d t o a warda reduc ti on ev enif the go ve rn m en t h adreco m m en de d o ne . See Un it edSta te s v . Jo hn so n, 1 32 F.3 d 6 28 , 63 0 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 8) (pe r cu ria m) (“ Tha t the sen te nc in g c ou rt i s n ot bo un d b y th e p art ie s’ agr eem en ts or r eco m m en da ti on s i s wel l s et tl ed .”). 5Mo reo ve r, itis hi gh ly im pr ob ab le th atth e d is tri ctco urt wo ul d h av e award eda reduc ti on gi ve n R iv ers ’ in si st en ce t o t he pro ba ti on off ic er tha t h e d idno t kn owi ng ly pos se ss an y

fir earm s. Ri ve rs ha s t hu s fa il edto sh ow t ha t h is sen te nc e wou ldha ve be endi ffer en t h adth e g ov ern m en t m ad e g oo d o n i ts pro m is e. See Pu ck et t, 5 56 U.S. at _

__ , 12 9 S . Ct. at14 33 n.4 . Abs en t a s ho win g t ha t h is subs ta nt ia l ri gh ts were af fect edby the go ve rn m en t’s b reac h o f th e p le a ag reem en t, Ri ve rs can no t es tabl is h p la in erro r. See De La Gar za, 5 16 F.3dat 1 27 0- 71 (“ It i s, atbe st , un cert ai n wh ethe r th e Gov ern m en t’s b reac h h adaneffe cton hi s s en te nc e, an d t he refo re we h ol d t ha t De La Gar za fa il edto est ab li shpl ai n e rro r.”) B. App li cat io n o f U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 Ri ve rs ne xtarg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt erredby inc reas in g h is off en se le ve l u nd er U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 (b )(1 )(A) b as edon it s fi nd in g t ha t the off en se in vo lv edth ree f

ire arm s. He s ub m it s t ha t the fla sh supp res so r di d n otqu al ify as a se pa rat e fi rearm

un de r § 2 K2.1 (b )(1 )(A) b ecau se itwas a tt ach edto th e .45 cal ib er pi st ol . In ad di ti on , he a ss ert s fo r th e fi rs t t im e o n app eal th athe di d n otkn owi ng ly po ss es s t he fla sh supp res so r. W e rev ie w a di st ric t co urt’s ap pl ic at io n a ndin te rp ret at io n o f th e Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s d e n ov o a ndit s fa ctua l fi nd in gs forcle ar erro r. See Un it edSta te s v . Rh in d, 2 89 F.3d69 0, 6 93 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ). Sect io n 2 K2.1 (b )(1 )(A) m an da te s a 6two -le ve l i nc reas e to a de fen da nt ’s off en se lev el if h e p os se ss edth ree t o s ev en fir earm s. See U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 (b )(1 )(A). The term “ fir earm ” is gi ve n t he same m ean in g a s u se d i n 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 1( a)(3 ), whi chin cl ud es “ an y fir earm m uf fle r or fir earm si le nc er.” U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 , comm en t. (n .1); 18 U.S.C. § 9 21 (a)( 3) (C). The PSI s ta te d t ha t the fla sh supp res so r atis su e was a si le nc er, a fa ctun di sp ut ed by Riv ers an d a do pt edby the di st ric t co urt. “ It i s t he law o f th is cir cu itth ata fai lu re t o o bjec t t o a ll eg at io ns of f actin a PSI ad m it s t ho se fact s fo r se nt en ci ng pu rp os es an d p recl ud es th e arg um en t tha t the re was erro r inth em .” Uni te d S ta te s v. Be ck le s, 5 65 F.3d83 2, 8 44 (11 thCir . 20 09 ) (quo ta ti on m ark s an d c it at io n om it te d) , pet it io n fo r cert. fi le d, (U.S. Jul y 16 , 20 09 ) (No . 09 -5 48 2) . Accor di ng ly, th e d is tri ctco urt co rrec tl y co un te d t he si le nc er (.4 5 c al ib er fl as h s up pr es so r) as a se pa rat e fi rearm

un de r U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 . W e al so rejectRiv ers ’ co nt en ti on th athe di d n otkn owi ng ly pos se ss th e fla sh supp res so r. Becaus e Ri ve rs di d n otrai se th is arg um en t i n t he di st ric t co urt, we rev ie w forpl ai n e rro r. For th e p ur po se s o f § 2 K2.1 (b )(1 ), th e d is tri ctco urt sh ou ld“ co un t o nl y

th os e fi rearm s tha t wer e u nl awfu ll y so ug htto be ob ta in ed , un la wfu ll y

po ss es se d, o r un la wfu ll y di strib ut ed. . . .” U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 , co m m en t. (n .5). Here , th ere was subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce tha t Ri ve rs kn owi ng ly po ss es se d t he fla sh supp res so r. Riv ers ag reedto pl eadgu il ty to Co un t On e o f th e 7in di ct m en t, wh ic h c ha rg edhi m with kno win gl y

po ss es si ng th e Ma st erp ie ce Arm s .45 cal ib er p is to l. Ri ve rs furth er adm it te d i n h is writ te n p le a ag reem en t tha t the Mas te rp ie ce Arm s .4 5 c al ib er p is to l h adanatt ach edfla sh supp res so r, whi ch was lo cat edin th e b acksea t o f th e v eh ic le he was d riv in g. Co ns is te ntwith h is gu il ty pl ea, Ri ve rs co nc ed edat the sen te nc in g h eari ng th at“ he is no t d en y in g p os se ss io n of th e g un .” Doc. 2 6 a t 1 0. Th e se nt en ci ng co urt was en ti tl edto ba se it s fa ctua l fin di ng s o n t he fact s ad m it te d b y Riv ers ’ gu il ty ple a o r ev id en ce p res en te d a t the se nt en ci ng he ari ng . See Un it edSta te s v . W il so n, 8 84 F.2d13 55 , 13 56 (11 th Ci r. 19 89 ). In a ny even t, the factth atRiv ers ha d re ady acce ss to th e fl as h supp res so r in th e v eh ic le ’s bac k s eatwas s uf fic ie ntto est ab li sh hi s kno win g po ss es si on of t ha t fi rearm . See Un it edSta te s v . Gon zal ez, 7 1 F .3d81 9, 8 35 (11 th Ci r. 19 96 ) (co nc lu di ng th atth e d efen da ntkn owi ng ly pos se ss eda weap onfou ndin th e g lo ve co m

partment o f th e carhe was i n, i rres pe ct iv e o f th e fac t tha t the car be lo ng edto an ot he r pe rs on ). Acco rd in gl y , we di sc ern no erro r, pl ai n o r othe rwis e, in th is m at te r. II I. CONCLUSI ON Insu m , we con cl ud e th atRiv ers ha s n otsh own th athi s s ub st an ti al rig ht s were af fect edby the go ve rn m en t’s fa il ur e to reco m m en d areduc ti on for acce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il ity . W e al so co nc lu de th atth e d is tri ctco urt co rrec tl y 8in crea se d R iv ers ’ of fen se lev el ba se d o n h is po ss es si on of t hr ee fi rearm s. We th eref or e AFFIRM Ri ve rs ’ co nv ic ti on an d s en te nc e. AFFIRMED.

9