FILED U.S. COURT OF A P P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IR C U IT NOV 08, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK

Honora ble Clay D. L and, United States District Judge f or the Middle District of * Georg ia, sitting by

designation. [ 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- 15757

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6
- 0 0 0 2 2
- CR- 1
- CLS- RRA 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 R L O S E D U P R E E M C E L R A T H , 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 o rth e N o r th e r n D i s tr i c to f A l a b a ma

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 8, 2007) B ef ore M A R C U S and P R Y O R , C i rc ui tJudg es , and L A N D , D i stri ctJudg e. * P E R C U R I A M: C a r lo s e D u p r e e M c E lr a th ( “M c E lr a th ” ) a p p e a ls f r o m h is 1 8 8
- m o n th2

sen t e nc e a f

t e rpl e a di ng gui l ty t o c ons pi r a c y t o di s tr i but e 5 gr a m s orm or e of
c oc a i ne ba s e , i n vi o l at i o n o f T i t l e 21, U ni t e d S t a t e s C ode , S e c t i ons 841( a ) ( 1) a nd ( b) ( 1) ( B ) , a nd t o di st ri b u t i o n of 50 gr a m s orm or e of

c oc a i ne ba s e , i n vi ol a t i on of T i t l e 21, U ni t ed S t at es C od e, S ec t i on s 841 (a )( 1) and (b)(1)(A ). A t i ss ue on appeal i s w h ether w e s ho ul d rem and t he ca se for r e- se nt enci ng si m pl y bec ause the di stri ct courtdi d n otsua s po nt e postpo ne se nt enci n g w hen t he D ef endantand h i s c ou nsel
r e c e i v e d a r e v i s e d Pr e s e n t e n c e I n v e s t i g a t i o n Re p o r t ( “ PSI ” ) th e s a me d a y a s t he
sen t en ci n g h eari n g . M cE l ra th co n t en d s th ath e w as d en i ed h i s d u e p ro cess ri g h t s, a n d h is s ta tu to r y r ig h ts u n d e rF e d e r a l R u le o f C r im in a l P r o c e d u r e 3 2 ( e ) ( 2 ) to
r e c e iv e th e P S I a t le a s t th ir ty - f iv e d a y s b e f

o r e s e n te n c in g , a n d u n d e rR u le 3 2 (i)( 1 )( A ) to h av e th e d istrict co u rt v er if y th at th e d ef

en d an t an d th e d ef

en d an t’ s a t t or ne y ha ve r e a d a nd di s c us s e d the pr e s e nt e nc e r e por t a nd a ny a dde ndu m t o t he
r e p o r t . A f

t e rth o r o u g h r e v i e w , w e c a n f i n d n o p l a i n e r r o r , a n d th e r e f o r e , a f f i r m. I . T he gr a nd j ur y c ha r ge d M c E l r a t h a nd hi s c o- de f e nda ntT e r r e nc e C l e von M oon, w ho i s noti nvol ve d i n thi s a pp eal , w i t h cons pi r a c y t o di s tr i but e a nd the
s u b s ta n tiv e c r im e o f

d is tr ib u tio n o f

c r a c k c o c a in e . S p e c if

ic a lly , M c E lr a th a n d h is
c o- de f e nda ntw e r e c ha r ge d i n C o u n t O ne w i th c ons pi r a c y t o “ di s tr i but e 5 gr a m s or m ore of a mi xture a nd subst ance cont ai ni ng a det ec tabl e a m ou ntof cocai ne base ,In the plea agreement, McElrath also waived his right to appeal, although hereserved 1 the right to appeal a

punishment that either e x ce ed ed the statutory maxi mum or constituted an up wa rd depa rt urefrom t heguide lin ese ntenc ingra ng e . Th e Go vernme nt ini tially mov e d to di smi ss this appeal on the ba sis of the a ppeal waiver, but has subsequently withdrawn its motion. The applicability

of the a ppeal waiver is ac cording ly now moot and we f

ocus onl y o n the Def

endant’ s substantive claim. 3 m or e c o mmo n l y r e f

e r r e d t o a s ‘ c r a c k ’ c o c a i n e , a c o n tr o l l e d s u b s t a n c e , i n v i o l a t i on of T i t l e 21, U ni t e d S t a t e s C od e, S ec t i ons 841( a ) ( 1) a nd ( b) ( 1) ( B ) , a l l i n vi ol a t i on of T i t l e 21, U ni t e d S t a t es C ode , S e c t i on 846. ” C ountT w o pe r t a i ne d onl y t o c od efen d an tM o o n . C o u n tT h ree ch arg e d M cE l rath w i th “ k n o w i n g l y, i n t en t i o n al l y, and u nl aw ful l y di stri bu t [i ng ] 50 gram s or m ore o f a m i xture a nd subst ance c o n ta in in g a d e te c tib le a m o u n t o f c o c a in e b a s e ” o n o ra b o u t N o v e m b e r1 4 , 2 0 0 5 , a vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S. C. §§ 84 1( a ) ( 1) a nd ( b) ( 1) ( A )
. Coun tFours i mi l a r l y c harged M cE l rath w i th d i stri b u t i n g 5 0 g ram s o r m o re o f a m i x tu re co n t ai n i n g c o c a i n e b ase on or abou tD ec em ber 13, 20 05 , i n v io lati o n of T i t l e 21, U ni t ed S t at es C od e, S e c tio n s 8 4 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) a n d ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A )
. A thi s a rr ai gn m ent , M cE l ra th o ri gi nal ly p le d n otgu i l ty t o t he three char ges le v e le d a g a in s t h im , b u t a t a h e a r in g o n M a r c h 1 6 , 2 0 0 6 , h e e n te r e d p le a s o f g u ilty t o C ou n t s O n e a n d Th r e e . A s p a r t o f th e p l e a d e a l , th e G o v e r n me n t a g r e e d t o ( 1) 1
m ov e thatC ou ntF ou r be di sm i ss ed; (2) r ec om m end t hat M cE lrath rece i ve a three
l e ve l r e duc t i on f

r om g ui de l i ne of

f e ns e l e ve l 32 t o 29 f ora c c e pt a nc e of
r e s pons i bi l i ty ; ( 3) r e c om m en d t ha tM c E l r a th be s e nt e nc e d a tthe l ow e nd of the4

advi sory gu i del i ne ra ng e; and (4) consi der f i l i ng a m ot i on for dow nw ar d d epar ture unde rU . S . S . G . 5k1. 1 a nd 18 U
. S . C . § 35 5 3 (e). D u r i ng thi s c ha nge - of
- pl e a he a r i ng, the di s tr i c tc our tque s t i one d the D e f e nda nte xt e ns i ve l y a bouthi s c om pe t e nc y , the
vo l un t ar i ness of hi s pl ea , and h i s und er st andi ng of the charg es to w hi ch he w as p le a d in g g u ilty
. T h e G o v er n m en t o ff

er ed th e fo ll o w in g fa ctu al fo u n d atio n fo r M c E lrath ’s gu i l ty pl ea s. O n N ov em ber 1, 20 0 5 , a confi dent i al source (“ C S ”) t el epho ned C ar l ose M cE l ra th and arra ng ed for the pu rc hase of 1 1 / 4 o un ce s of c ra ck cocai ne. T he C S l at ertra vel ed t o t he m ee t i ng l ocat i on , at53 9 G arre t tR oad, S yl ac auga, A l abam a, and adv i se d t he agent s in ch ar ge of the ca se thatthe vehi cl e of T erre nce M oon w a s a tthe resi d e nc e . M om e nt s l a t e r , M c E l r a th a nd M oon dr ove up t o the
r e s i de nc e i n a w hi t e L i nc ol n. M c E l r a th i nf or m e d the C S tha the ha d the ounc e of
c r a c k b u t th a t th e C S w o u ld h a v e to g o g e t i t f r o m M o o n a t th e “tr a p .” ( T h e tr a p is
a d ru g - d e a l i n g l oc a t i o n u s e d t o a v o i d a s s o c i a t i o n w i th th e d ru g d e a l e r s . ) Th e CS tr a ve l e d t o the tr a p, m e tw i th M oon a nd pur c ha s e d one ounc e of c r a c k c oc a i ne f

or $850. M c E l r a th then cal l e d the C S t o r e por ttha tthe 1/ 4 ounc e tha tr e m a i ne d of the tra nsac ti o n w o u ld arri ve atthe l ocat i on short l y. T he agent s l at erre tri eved the cr ac k
c o c a in e , w h ic h w e ig h e d 3 1 .1 g r a m s . O n N ove m be r14, 2005, the C S a rr a nge d t o c ons um m a t e a nothe rtr a ns a c t i on5

to b u y c r a c k c o c a in e f r o m M c E lr a th f

o r $ 1 ,5 7 5 . D u r in g a te le p h o n e c a ll w ith M c E lr a th , th e C S w a s t o l d t h a t th e “to o lb o x ” - - i.e ., tw o o u n c e s o f c r a c k - - w o u ld b e read y s hor t l y . M c E l r a th the n t ol d the C S t o m e e t hi m “ up t op, ” w hi c h w a s a c o d e f o rM c E lr a th ’s “tr a p ” o n C o le m a n R o a d in S y la c a u g a . T h e C S a n d M c E lr a th l at er m etat th e lo cat i o n o n C o l em an R o ad an d tran sact ed th e tw o o u n ce p u rch ase an d sal e o f co cai n e. T h e crack co cai n e su b seq u en t l y retri ev ed w ei g h ed 5 7 . 6 g ram s. M c E l r a th’ s i ni t i a l P S I , di s c l os e d t o the pa r t i e s on M a y 24 , 2006,
r e c om m e nde d gr a nt i ng M c E l r a th a thr e e - l e ve l r e duc t i on i n hi s of f e n se l eve l f

or a c c e p ta n c e o f r e s p o n s ib ility , p u r s u a n t to U .S .S .G . § 3 E 1 .1 , a n d in a c c o r d a n c e w ith the pl ea agre em ent . O n Jun e 20, 20 06 , ho w ev er , a re v is ed P S I r eportw as prepare d d e n y in g th e th r e e - le v e l r e d u c tio n b e c a u s e o f tw o d ru g o f

f e n s e s th a t M c E lr a th
c o m m itte d a f

te re n te r in g a g u ilty p le a . F ir s t , o n M a y 1 0 , 2 0 0 6 , M c E lr a th s o ld
a p p r o x im a te ly o n e o u n c e o f c r a c k c o c a in e to a c o o p e r a tin g in d iv id u a l, r e s u ltin g in the re vo ca t i on of his b o n d
. S ec on d, on M ay 17 , 20 06 , M cE l ra th’ s uri ne t es t ed pos i t i ve f

orH y dr oc odone a nd H yd ro m orphone
. T he r e vi s e d P S I w a s not di s c l os e d, how e ve r , t o the di s tr i c tc our t , M c E l r a th, orhi s de f e ns e c ouns e l , unt i l the d a y o f th e s e n te n c in g h e a r in g , h e ld o n O c to b e r2 0 , 2 0 0 6 . A f t e rbe c om i ng a w a r e a tthe s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng of the r ev i sed P S I, the di s tr i c t c ou r t di r e c t e d tha t the D e f e nd a nt a nd hi s c ou ns e l r e c e i ve a c op y , and t hen6

pr oc e e de d t o e xpl a i n the di f f eren ces b et w e e n the i ni t i a l a nd r e vi s e d P S I s t o the D ef endant
. T he changes i n t he P S I w er e li m i t ed t o M cE l ra th’ s i nt erveni ng cr i m i nal cond uctand t he ac co m p an ying deni al of a three -l evel re du ct i on i n h i s off ense l evel
c a l c ul a t i on f

ora c c e pt a nc e of

r e s pons i b i l i t y. T he di s tr i c tc our tga ve the D e f e nda nt
a n oppor tuni ty t o obj e c tt o th e d en i al o f a thr e e - l e ve l a dj us tm e ntf ora c c e pt a nc e of
r e s p o n s ib ility
. A cc ept i ng the di stri ct court ’ s i nv i t at i on , M cE l ra th di d obj ec t t o the ch an ge. B u t, n o ta b ly , th e D e f

e n d a n t d i d n o t o b

je c t to th e f

a c t th a t h e h a d n o t p r e v io u s ly
r e c e i ve d a co p y o f t h e r e vi s e d P S I . M c E l r a th thus ne ve rr e que s t e d a c ont i nua nc e of the se nt enci ng proceedi ng s. Ind ee d , he never sa i d t hathi s r i gh t s w er e i n any w ay p r e ju d ic e d b y th e f

a ilu r e to g r a n t a c o n tin u a n c e . T he di stri ctcourtov erru led M cE l ra th’ s obj ec t i on t o t he deni al of the three
l e ve l a dj us tm e nt , i ns t e a d a dopt i ng the r e vi s e d P S I a nd m a ki ng a f i ndi ng tha tthe gui de l i ne of

f e ns e l e ve l w a s 32 a nd the c r i m i na l hi s t or y c a t e gor y w a s I I I , r e s ul t i ng i n a se nt enci ng gu i deli ne ra ng e of 151 t o 1 88 m on ths’ i m pri sonm ent . T he di stri ct c o u r t a ls o ex p l ai n ed th ati tw as g o i n g fo rw ard w i th th e sen t en ci n g o u to f fai rn ess f o r th e D efen d an t b ecau se M cE l rath w as sch ed u l ed t o b e sen t en ced th e sam e d ay in f r o n t o f a n o th e rd is tr ic t c o u r t ju d g e f o ro th e rc r im e s , n o tin g th a t: pos tponi ng y ours e nt e nc e unt i l a f t e rthe s e nt e nc i ng pr oc e edi ng s c he dul e d f

or2: 0 0 o ’ c l oc k t oda y be f or e J udge C l e m on w oul d ha ve7

re su lt ed i n an i ncre as e i n you r c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory. A nd i f i thad gone up t o - - l e t ’ s j us ts a y a I V w i th an o ffens e l e ve l of 32, y ou’ d be lo o k in g a t 1 6 8 to 2 1 0 m o n th s . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t th e r e a f te rs e n te n c e d M c E lr a th to 1 8 8 m o n th s i m p r i s o n m e n t. T h is tim e ly a p p e a l f

o llo w e d
. II . B e c a u s e M c E lr a th d id n o t r a i s e a n o b je c tio n a t s e n te n c in g to th e la te di sc l osure of the re vi se d P S I, w e w i l l re vi ew his cl ai m on l y f or pl ai n err or. S ee U n ite d S ta te s v . S h e lto n , 4 0 0 F .3 d 1 3 2 5 , 1 3 2 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . U n d e rth e p la in
error s t an d ar d o f r evi ew , w e w i l l re vers e a di stri ctcourtdeci si on on l y i f ( 1) an
e r r or w a s c o mmi t t e d ; ( 2 ) th e e r r o rw a s p l a i n ; a n d ( 3 ) th e e r r o ra f f e c t e d t he
s ubs t a nt i a l ri g h t s o f the de f e nda nt . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. O l a no, 507 U . S . 725, 732 (199 3). A n err or af

fe ct s adefe nd ant ’ s s ub st an ti al ri gh t s i f the error w as prej ud i ci al
a n d a f f e c t e d th e o u t c o m e o f

th e d i s tr i c tc o u r tp r o c e e d i n g s . I d
. a t7 3 4 . I f we di s c ove r a p l ai n errortha ta f f e c t s s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s , w e w i l l r e m a nd f ora c or r e c t i on o f th e e r r o ro n ly if

th e e r r o r“s e r io u s ly a f f e c t [ s ] t h e f

a ir n e s s , in te g r ity o rp u b lic
re pu t at i on of j ud i ci al proceedi ng s. ” I d. at73 6 (al t er at i on in ori gi nal ). T he bu rden
r e s t s w i th the m ova nt( he r e the D e f e n d an t ) t o e s t a bl i s h e a c h e l e m e ntof pl a i n e r r or by a pr e ponde r a n ce of the e vi de nc e . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R odr i gue z , 398 F . 3d 1291, 1 2 9 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 )
.Rule 32(e) (2) provides in pertinent par t: “The probation officer

must give the 2 presentenc e re p o rt to the defendant, the def endant’ s attorney, and an attorney for the g overnment at least 35 da

ys before sentencingunless the def endant waives this mini mum period.” McElrath has not alleg ed a violation of e ither F ederal Rule of Criminal Procedure 3 32 (g), wh ic h p ro vide s that “ [a]t l e a st 7 da ys b e fo rese ntenc ing , th eprob atio n o ff ic e r m us t su bmi t to the court a

nd to the parties the presentence report a nd an adden dum co nt ai ning a ny unresolved objections, the grounds for those obje ctions, and the probation officer ’s comments on them” or 18 U . S . C . § 3 5 5 2 ( d) , wh i c hr e qu i r e s th ec o urtt o di s c l o s eth eP S I t o th ed e f en d ant , th ed e f

e n s eatt o r n e y, and the Government’s attorney at least ten da

ys prior to the dateset for sentencing
. 8 M c E lr a th c la im s th e d is tr ic t c o u r t v i o la te d th e D u e P r o c e s s C la u s e , a s w e ll
a s F e de r a l R ul e of

C r i m i na l P r oc e dur e 3 2 (e)( 2) , w hi c h r e qui r e s the pr oba t i on 2 of f i c er t o fu rn i s h the P S I t o the de f e nda nta tl e a s tthi r ty - f i ve da y s be f

or e the
s e n te n c in g h e a r in g u n le s s th e d e f e n d a n t w a iv e s th is m in im u m p e r i o d , a n d R u le 32 (i )( 1)(A ), w hi ch, i n turn, re qu i re s acourtbefore i m po si ng se nt ence t o “ veri fy tha tthe de f

e nda nta nd the de f

e nda nt ’ s a t t or ne y ha ve r e a d a nd di s c us s e d the p r e s e n te n c e r e p o r t a n d a n y a d d e n d u m to th e r e p o r t.” 3 Th e d i s tr i c tc o u r tn o t e d th a tRu l e 3 2 ( e ) ( 2 ) a p p l i e s o n l y t o th e o r i g i n a l PSI
a nd nott o the r e vi s e d P S I . S i nc e the or i gi na l P S I w a s di s c l os e d t o the D e f e nda nt
m o r e th a n th ir ty - f

iv e d a y s b e f

o r e s e n te n c in g , th e G o v e r n m e n t a r g u e s th a t R u le 32( e ) ( 2) w a s notvi ol a t e d. A c a r e f ul rea di ng of

othe rpr ovi s i ons i n R ul e 32
s ugge s t s th a t i s th e c a s e . Ru l e 3 2 ( f ) g i v e s th e p a r t i e s a n o p p o r tu n i ty t o o b j e c t t o t he P S I w i thi n fou rt ee n d ay s o f r ec ei vi ng i t , and R ul e 32(g) prov i des thatatl ea stse ven da y s be f or e s e n t en ci n g , t h e pr oba t i on of f i c e rm us ts ubm i tt o the c our ta nd t o the9

pa r t i e s th e PSI a n d a n a d d e n d u m c o n t a i n i n g a n y u n r e s o l v e d o b j e c t i o n s , t he g r o u n d s f

o rth o s e o b

je c tio n s , a n d th e p r o b a tio n o f f ic e r ’s c o m m e n ts o n th e m . R u le 32 ’ s se qu e nc e of

t i mi ng f orr e c e i vi ng a nd ob

j e c t i ng t o aPS I the r e f

or e s ug ge s t s that th e th ir ty - f

iv e d a y r e q u ir e m e n t a p p lie s o n ly to th e o r ig in a l P S I . H o w eve r , w e ne e d notde t e r m i ne the a ppl i c a bi l i ty of R ul e 32( e ) ( 2) t o a r e v is e d P S I b e c a u s e , e v e n a s s u m in g a r g u e n d o th a t th e r e w a s a n e r r o r , a n d th a t it
w as pl ai n, the D ef

endanthas notbegu n t o m ee thi s burden o f s ho w i ng thathe has be e n pr e j udi c e d be c a us e the di s tr i c tc our tdi d not , s ua s pont e , pos tpo ne the
s e nt e nc i ng . T h e purpos e of the thi r ty - f

i ve da y r e qui r e m e nti s t o e ns ur e f a i r ne s s a nd
a c c ur a c y i n s e nt e nc i ng b y al l ow i ng the de f e nda nta de qua t e t i m e t o f i nd a ny obj e c t i ona bl e r e c om m en d at i o n s i n the P S I . H a vi ng obj e c t e d t o the onl y r e a l c ha nge f r o m th e o r ig in a l P S I - - th e th r e e - le v e l a d ju s tm e n t f

o ra c c e p ta n c e o f

r e s p o n s ib ility

- - the D e f

e nda ntw a s notpr e

j udi c e d by the tru n cat ed t i m e he ha d t o c ons i de rthe
r e v is e d P S I . I n d e e d , it s e e m s , to th e c o n tr a r y , th a t th e D e f e n d a n t a c tu a lly b en efi t t ed fro m th e d i stri ct co u rt ’ s d eci si o n n o t t o d el ay p ro ceed i n g s b e cau se M cE l ra th w as sc hedu l ed t o b e s ent ence d the sa m e day in fr o n tof anot her di stri ct courtj ud ge for other c ri m es . H ad the se n tenci ng for tho se ot her c ri m es t aken pl ac e fi rs t , the D ef

endant ’ s c ri m i nal -hi st ory c at egory i n t hi s c as e c ou l d h ave c hang ed f r om a l e ve l I I I t o a tl e a s t a l ev el IV , the r e by e l e va t i ng hi s e xpos ur e - - a poi ntthe10

di s tr i c tc our tm a de a bunda nt l y cl eart o the D e f e nda nta tthe t i m e of

s e nt e nc i ng. S i m pl y put , M c E l r a th’ s s ubs t a nt i a l r i g h t s w e r e nota f f e c t e d. H e ha s s how n no p r e ju d ic e . A c c o r d in g ly , h is c la im s m u s t b e d e n ie d a n d th e s e n te n c e a f f ir m e d
. AF F I RME D.