### The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District 1 

### Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. ___________ No. 96-2095

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Fred Stephen McCaslin, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: October 25, 1996 Filed: November 26, 1996

___________ Before BOWMAN, MAGILL, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Fred S. McCaslin challenges the sentence imposed by the Distric t Court after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess methamphetamin e

1 with intent to distribute. We affirm.
According to the presentence report (PSR), a search of McCaslin 's and a codefendant's resid ence uncovered roughly 18.5 grams of methamphetamine and two loaded semiautomatic pistols. McCaslin was "directly connected" to over 31 kilograms of methamphetamine, but the government stipulated tha t for sentencing purposes, he was accountable for 1 to 3 kilograms. The PSR
assesse d a two-level increase under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manua l § 2 D1.1(b)(1) (1995), because McCaslin possessed the firearms "i n connection with" his drug-trafficking activities.

### -2- In a letter to the probation officer , McCaslin's counsel objected to the se ction 2D1.1(b)(1) increase, asserting that there was no evidenc e McCaslin had possesse d any firearm during his drug-trafficking activities and that the increase could not be imposed absent evidence that McCaslin had actively used the guns. At sentencing, although counsel briefl y mentioned that the gu ns were never tied to any type of drug deal and that there was not a clear showing of ownership, he p rimarily argued that under Bailey v. United States , 116 S. Ct. 501 (1995), a defendant had to activel y use a gu n to be held accountable for it. The District Court conclude d Bailey was inapplicable, overruled the objection, and sentenced McCaslin to 262 months imprisonment and five years supervised release.
McCaslin now contends the District C ourt erred in assessing the twolevel increase, because the government offered no evidence that h e possessed the guns inconnection with his criminal activity and the Court failed to make a finding on this disputed fact.

A two -level increase is appropriate if the government proves by a prepon derance of the evidence that the defendant possessed a dangerou s weapon and it is not clearly improbable the weapon was connected with the off ense. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1(b)(1) & commen t (n.3) (1995); United States v. Betz , 82 F.3d 205, 210 (8th Cir. 1996)
. McCaslin did not dispute that the firearms were found with the drugs at hi s residence during the period of the conspiracy to which he pleaded guilty. Those undisputed fact s were sufficient to support the section 2D1.1(b)(1) increase. See United States v. LaRoche , 83 F.3d 958, 959 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (district court entitled to accept as true factual statements in PSR to which defendant does not object); United States v. Tauil

Hernandez , 88 F.3d 576, 580 (8th Cir. 1996) (in conspiracy case, sufficien t nexus f or § 2D1.1(b)(1) increase established if weapons found in sam e location as drugs or where part of conspiracy occurred); United States v. Hiveley , 61 F.3d

### -3-

1358 , 1363 (8th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (proof of connection betwee n firearms and criminal activity does not require showing defendant used or touched gun; constructive possession will suffic e); see also United States v. Thomas , 93 F.3d 47 9, 488 n.5 (8th Cir. 1996) (stating that Bailey does not affect application of § 2D1.1(b)(1)). The District Court was no t oblig ated to make a factual finding on the matter McCaslin now raises , because he did not make a clear and specific objection as to that issue. See United States v. Toirac , 917 F.2d 11, 13 (8th Cir. 1990).
Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.