FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T DECEMBER 9, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 11 35 6 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :0 9- cr-0 00 03 -J OF-CC H-1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pl ai nt iff - App el le e, ve rs us W ILLIAM ANTHONY H ENDLEY , ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defen da nt- App el la nt .

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ 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 Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Dece m be r 9, 2 01 0) Befo re EDMONDSON, PRYOR an d KRAVITC H, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: W il li am Ant ho ny Hend le y

pl ead edgu il ty to the un la wfu l p os se ss io n o f a fir earm by a con vi ct edfel on un de r 18 U.S.C. § 9 22 (g ) an d was sen te nc edto a te rmof

10 6 m on th s’ im

pr is on m en t an d t hr ee years o f supe rv is edrel eas e. Hend le y ap pe al s fr om

hi s s en te nc e, whi ch he arg ue s was ba se d o n a n i m pr op erl y cal cu la te d gu id el in es ran ge . I. One ni gh t i n Ap ril 20 08 , po li ce i n R os well , Geor gi a res po nd edto rep orts of gu nf ire in a publ ic pa rk . After a rri vi ng at t he pa rk , th e o ffi cers ap pr oa ch edtwo
m enlea vi ng a woo de d a rea. Whenth e p ol ic e id en ti fie d t he m se lv es , on e o f th e two m en , Hend le y , fle d. Th e p ol ic e ch as edHend le y an d e ve ntua ll y

ap pr eh en de d hi m . Whe n t he off

ic ers retrace d t he pa th of t he ch as e, th ey fou nda ha nd gu n a nd , 20 y ard s awa y

fro m th e h an dg un , two cel lo ph an e b ag s. On e b ag co nt ai ne d 1 4.4 gr am s o f cra ck

co cai ne an d t he ot he r co nt ai ne d 3 .3 g ram s o f m ari juan a. Altho ug h th e o ffi cers ha d n otsee n Hen dl ey di sc ardth e dru gs , th ey

ass um edth athe m

us t ha ve be cau se th e b ag s wer e dry de sp it e a rec en t ra in st orm . Hend le y ’s han ds tes te d po si ti ve forgu ns ho t re si du e, an d h e ev en tu al ly adm it te d t ha t t he gu n was hi s. Hen dl ey was i nd ic te d fo r po ss es si on with i nt en t t o d is tri bu te m or e th anfiv e gr am s o f co cai ne ba se , 21 U.S.C. § 8 41 , po ss es si on of afir earm as aco nv ic te d fel on , 18 U.S.C. § 9 22 (g ), an d p os se ss io n o f a fi rearm in furth eran ce o f a drug -tr affi ck in g o ffen se , 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (c). Hen dl ey pl ead edgu il ty to the fel on in -p os se ss io n c ha rg e, an d t he go ve rn m en t m ov edto di sm is s t he ot he r ch arg es . 2Befo re s en te nc in g t he pro ba ti on off ic er re co m

m en de d t ha t Hen dl ey ’s bas e of fen se lev el un de r th e Sen te nc in g Gu id el in es be in crea se d b y fou r po in ts be cau se he ha d p os se ss eda fi rearm “ in co nn ect io n” with ano th er fe lo ny, pos se ss io n o f
crac k c oc ai ne with i nt en t t o d is tri bu te . Se e U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 (b )(6 ). Hend le y ob jecte d t o t he en ha nc em en t, ar gu in g t ha t t he dru gs were n othi s an d, atan y rat e, th ey were fo un d i n adi ffer en t p la ce fr om hi s g un . At the sen te nc in g h eari ng , Ros well po li ce d et ect iv e Ma rkMac do na ld te st ifi edth at , whi le he was c ha si ng Hend le y , he s m el le d u nb urne d m ari juan a n ear a ti re tha t h e an d Hen dl ey ha d ju m pe d o ve r. Macd on al d fu rth er t es ti fie d tha t h e fo un d the dru gs ne ar the ti re ab ou t 2 0 yards fro m th e g un . The g ov ern m en t al so arg ue d t ha t t he cel lo ph an e b ag s wer e dry ev enth ou gh itha d re cen tl y rai ne d a nd
no te d t ha t Hen dl ey

ha d o nc e b efo re d is card eddru gs whi le fle ei ng fro m th e p ol ic e. Hen dl ey ’s cou ns el res po nd edth atth e dru gs co ul d h av e b el on ge d t o a nyon e, an d th atif Hen dl ey

ha d d is card edth em , Macd on al d wo ul d h av e se enhi m do it
. The di stric t co urt fo un d t ha t t he go ve rn m en t h adpro ve d t ha t Hen dl ey ha d pr ob ab ly pos se ss edth e fi rearm in co nn ect io n wi th th e fel on y dru g o ffen se . Acco rd in gl y , th e co urt ap pl ie d t he en ha nc em en t. The res ul ti ng gu id el in es ran ge was 11 0 t o 1 20 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, b utth e jud ge va rie d d own wardan d
se nt en cedHend le y

to 10 6 m on th s’ im

pr is on m en t an d t hr ee years o f supe rv is ed 3rel eas e. He no w app eal s h is sen te nc e, arg ui ng th atitwas b as edon anim pr op erl y cal cu la te d g ui de li ne s ra ng e b ecau se hi s o ffen se lev el was e rro ne ou sl y en ha nc edby th e d is tri ctco urt’s fi nd in g t ha t h e h adpo ss es se d t he ha nd gu n i n c on ne ct io n wi th
an ot he r fel on y . II. W e rev ie w th e d is tri ctco 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 Gu id el in es de no vo . Uni te d Sta tes v. Rh in d , 28 9 F .3d69 0, 6 93 (11 th Ci r. 20 02 ). Factua l fi nd in gs , onth e o th er h an d, ar e rev ie wedforcle ar erro r. Id
.

“ Fo r a fac tu al fin di ng to be cle arl y erro ne ou s, thi s co urt, af

te r rev ie win g a ll of t he
ev id en ce, m

us t b e le ft wi th a de fin it e an d fi rm co nv ic ti on th ata m is ta ke ha s b een co m m it te d.” Uni te d Sta tes v. Ro dr ig ue z-Lo pe z , 36 3 F .3d11 34 , 11 37 (11 th Cir
. 20 04 ). Whe n ade fen da ntob jects to anen ha nc em en t u nd er the Gui de li ne s, the go ve rn m en t b ears th e b ur de n o f pr ov in g any dis pu te d fa ct s b y a pr ep on de ran ce o f th e ev id en ce. Uni te d Sta tes v. Ma rt in ez , 58 4 F .3d10 22 , 10 27 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ). The Sen te nc in g Gu id el in es pro vi de fora fo ur -p oi ntenhanc em en t t o a de fen da nt ’s bas e o ffen se lev el if h e p os se ss eda fi rearm “ in co nn ect io n wi th ”
an ot he r fel on y . U.S.S.G. § 2K2 .1(b )(6 ). If th e o th er fe lo ny is a d ru g- tra ffi ck in g of fen se , th e en ha nc em en t ap pl ie s wh en ev er the fir earm was fo un d i n c lo se pr ox im ity to th e dru gs . Id

. atco m m en t. (n .14 (B)) . Whe n the ot he r fel on y is no t a 4drug -tr affi ck in g o r bu rg la ry off en se , th e en ha nc em en t o nl y ap pl ie s i f th e po ss es si on of t he fir earm faci li ta te d o r ha d t he po te nt ia l t o fa ci li ta te th e o th er fel on y . Id
. at c omm en t. (n .14 (A)). Alt ho ug h Hen dl ey

arg ue s t ha t the go ve rn m en t d idno t p res en t an y ev id en ce th athe was e ng ag edin tra ffi ck in g d ru gs , he d idno t o bjec t t o t he PSI’s co nt en ti on th atth e p ol ic e h adfou nd14 .4 g ram s o f cra ckco cai ne . Whe n Hen dl ey was se nt en ced , 14 .4 g ram s o f cra ckwas s uf fic ie ntto supp ort an in di ct m en t fo r po ss es si on with i nt en t t o d is tri bu te . 21 U.S.C. § 8 41 (b )(1 )(B) (ii i) ( 20 06 ) ame nded by Pub. L. 11 0- 22 0, § 2(a )(2 ). Andpo ss es si on with i nt en t t o d is tri bu te is a drug 1 tra ffi ck in g o ffen se . 2 Bec au se th e quant it y

of dru gs supp orte d afin di ng th atwho ev er p os se ss ed th em was e ng ag edina drug -tr affi ck in g o ffen se , to pro ve th atth e en hanc em en t sh ou ldap pl y

th e g ov ern m en t h adto sh ow t ha t t he dru gs an d g un were fo un d i n cl os e p ro xi m it y

to on e an ot he r an d t ha t the dru gs pro babl y be lo ng edto Hend le y . U.S.S.G. § 2 K2.1 (b )(6 ), co m m en t. (n .14 (B))
. The amount of cra ck coc aine ne cessa ry to support an indictment for possession with 1 intent to distribute wa s increa sed from 5 gr ams to 28 g rams, ef fec tive August 3, 2010. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(2) (“F or purpose s of this subsection, the term ‘dr ugtraff icking 2 crime’ means a

ny felony punishable under

the Controlled Substances Ac t . . . .”); U.S.S.G. § 5K2.20, comment. (n.1) (“‘ Serious drugtraff ickingoffe nse’ mea

ns any controlled substanc e offe nse under

title 21, United States Code, other than simple possession . . . that provides for a mandatory

minimumterm of imprisonment of five year s or greater . . . .” ). 5At the sen te nc in g h eari ng , th e g ov ern m en t es tabl is he d t ha t t he dru gs an d

gu n wer e fo un d wi th in 20 y ard s o f eac h o th er. Thi s s at is fie s t he clo se -p ro xi m it y requi rem en t. The di st ric t co urt al so fou ndth atdru gs were l ik el y Hend le y ’s and th athe ha d d is card edth e dru gs as h e fl edth e p ol ic e. The d is tri ctco urt b as edth is fin di ng on anearl ie r in ci de ntwher e Hen dl ey di sc ard eddru gs whi le fle ei ng fro m th e p ol ic e, as well as t he lo cat io n o f th e dru gs on th e p ath. Inad di ti on , th e co urt
no te d t ha t t he m ari

juan a’s st ro ng od orsu gg es te d t ha t t he itha d n otbe enin th e op enfor ve ry lo ng . Thes e fac ts are s uf fic ie ntto supp ort t he di st ric t co urt’s fi nd in g th atth e dru gs were p ro babl y Hend le y ’s, andth athe ha d p os se ss eda fi rearm in
co nn ect io n wi th an ot he r fel on y off en se . Accor di ng ly, th e d is tri ctco urt’s ap pl ic at io n o f th e § 2K2 .1(b )(6 ) en ha nc em en t was co rrec t, an d Hen dl ey ’s sen te nc e is AFFIRMED.

6