### F I LE D U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E LEVE NTH CI RCUI T Se pt e m be r 30, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN C L E RK

Honora ble Pasco M. B owman, II , United States Circuit Judg e for the Eighth Circuit, 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. 04- 14589

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 0 0 0 1 6 - CR- 5 - M CR UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff -A pp el l ee C r o s s - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s C H A D C H R I S T O P H E R P Y N E , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n tC r o s s - A p p e lle e .

_______________________ A pp ea l s f

rom the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe N or the r n D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 30, 2005) B efo re B IR C H , H U L L an d B O W M A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. *2

P E R C U R I A M: C h a d C h r is to p h e rP y n e a p p e a ls h is 2 0 0 - m o n th s e n te n c e f o rc o n s p ir a c y to m a nuf a c tur e , di s tr i but e , a nd pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e m or e tha n 50 gr a m s of m e tha m phe t a m i ne a nd m or e tha n 500 gr a m s of am i xtur e a nd s ubs t a nc e c ont a i ni ng m e th a m p h e ta m in e , in v io la tio n o f 2 1 U .S .C . § § 8 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( v iii) a n d 8 4 6 , a n d h is c o n c u r r e n t 1 2 0 - m o n th s e n te n c e f o rp o s s e s s io n o f

a f ir e a r m b y a c o n v ic te d f

e lo n , in vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . §§ 922( g) ( 1) a nd 924( a ) ( 2) . R e l y i ng on U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B oo ker, 54 3 U . S . , 12 5 S . C t . 73 8 (20 05 ), P yne a rgues thatthe di stri ctcourterre d w he n i ts e nt e nc e d hi m unde ra m a nda t or y S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s s c he m e . T he go vernm entcr oss- appeal s the di stri ctcourt ’ s gra ntof a dow nw ar d d epar ture und er th e Gu i d e l i n e s a n d i t s r e f u s a l t o s e n t e n c e P y n e a s a c a r e e ro f f e n d e r . Af

t e rr e v i e w, w e va c a t e P y ne ’ s s e nt e nc e s a nd r e m a nd f orr e s e nt e nc i ng. I . B AC KG RO UN D A . Pl e a C o l l o quy P y ne pl e d gui l ty t o the a bove drug c ons pi r a c y a nd f i r e a r m c ha r ge s . D ur i ng the pl ea col l oq uy, the go vernm entfi l ed a s t at em entof fa ct s, w hi ch P yne a dm i t t ed as true. In thatst at em ent , the go vernm entexpl ai ned t hatthe B ay C ou nt y, F l ori da, S heri ff’ s O ff

i ce exec ut ed a s t at e s ea rc h w arra ntfor the prem i se s of K i m B row n at 2606 B e e c h S tr e e t , P a na m a C i ty B e a c h, F l or i da , on N ove m be r19, 2003. D ur i ng3

the execut i on of the w arra nt , the agent s di sc ov er ed chem i ca l s a nd l aborat ory i nstrum ent s i n B row n’ s gar age. B row n adv i se d t he agent s thatthe i t em s bel on ged to h e rb o y f

r ie n d , P y n e . W h e n P y n e a r r iv e d a t th e p r e m is e s d u r in g th e s e a r c h , h is pe r s on a nd ve hi c l e w e r e s e a r c he d. T he a ge nt s di s c ove r e d: ( 1) a ppr oxi m a t e l y one g r a m o f me th a mp h e t a mi n e i n s i d e o n e o f h i s p o c k e t s ; ( 2 ) a p p r o x i ma t e l y 1 1 0 0 g r a ms of m etham ph et am i ne oi l i n a backpack on the back sea tof hi s vehi cl e; and (3) a B ry co A rm s . 38 0 p i st ol i n a bl ac k cas e i n t he hat chback of hi s vehi cl e. A ft erP yne w as advi se d o f hi s r i gh t s, he adm i t t ed t o o pera t i ng anot her l a bor a t or y a thi s r e s i de nc e , 8315 G ul f P i ne s D r i ve , P a na m a C i ty B e a c h, F l or i da , a nd c ons e nt e d t o i t s s e a r c h. A thi s r e s i de nc e , the a ge nt s f ound a ppr oxi m a t e l y 98 c ont a i ne r s of

l i qui ds , m or e tha n tw o gr a m s of m e tha m phe t a m i ne , a nd va r i ous c he m i c a l s a nd i ns trum e nt s us e d i n the m a nuf a c tur e of m e tha m phe t a m i ne . T he go vernm ent ’ s s t at em entof fa ct s c i t ed t aped st at em ent s i n w hi ch P yne a dm i t t ed that he: (1) had cook ed approx i m at el y t en gram s of m etham ph et am i ne al m ostevery day a thi s r e s i de nc e f

ora bouta m onth a nd a ta nothe rl oc a t i on f ora boutf

ourm onths ; ( 2) ow ne d the l a bor a t or i e s f ound both on B e e c h S tr e e ta nd on G ul f P i ne s D r i ve a nd the m e tha m phe t a m i ne oi l f

ound i n hi s ve hi c l e ; a nd ( 3) ha d obt a i ne d the . 380 pi s t ol a boutf ourm onths e a r l i e r . T he s t a t e m e ntof f a c t s a l s o i ndi c a t e d tha tP y ne ha d a pri or fe l on y s t at e c on vi ct i on for a n at t em pt ed ho m e i nv as i on and t hatthe pi st ol hadTh ere le va nt Guid e lin e s aretho sein e ff e c t at the tim e of Py

ne ’s sentenc inghe aring , unle ss 1 a more lenient punishment w ould result under the Guidelines eff ective on the date o f P y n e’s offenses. 18 U.S .C. 3553(a) (4)(A); Unit ed States v. Wilson, 993 F.2d 214, 216 (11th Cir. 1993). The PSIdoes no t m enti on which Guidelines version was used; however, be causePy ne wa s se ntenc e d o n Augus t 19 , 2 00 4, hesh ould h avebe e n s e ntenc e d und e r t he20 03 Guide lin e s. Al l Guidelines citations herein are to the 2003 Guidelines. 4 b e e n m a n u f

a c tu r e d o u ts id e F lo r id a . D u r in g th e p le a h e a r in g , P y n e a d m itte d th a t h e h a d “b o u g h t th e c h e m ic a ls to m ake the drug [, ] . . . m ade the drug and . . . sol d i t . ” H e a l so adm i t t ed thathe w as a w a r e tha tthe pi s t ol w a s “ i n the ba c k of [ hi s ] c a r ” a nd tha the ha d a pr e vi ous f e l ony conv i ct i on . P yne a ckno w l edged t hathe un ders t oo d t hatthe S ent enci ng G ui del i nes appl i ed and “ thatthe di stri ctcourtw [oul d] m ake the fi nal det erm i nat i on of fa ct s a s t o any se nt enci ng i ss ue. ” T he di stri ctcourtthen acce pt ed P yne’ s gui l ty pl ea . B. Pr e s e nt e nc e I nv e s t i g a t i o n a nd Se nt e nc i ng T h e P resen t en ce In v est i g at i o n R ep o rt(“ P S I”) reco m m en d ed a b ase o ffen se l e v e l o f 3 3 . T h e P S I a l s o n o t e d th a tth e c a r e e ro f f e n d e rp r o v i s i o n , U. S . S . G. 1 §4B 1. 1, a ppl i e d be c a us e P y ne ha d tw o pr e vi ous , unr e l a t e d f e l ony c onvi c t i ons i nv ol vi ng cr i m es of vi ol ence , spec i fi ca l l y a t t em pt ed ho m e i nv as i on s. C ar ee r offe nd erst atus i ncre as ed P yne’ s off ense l evel fr om 33 t o 3 7 and hi s c ri m i nal hi st ory c a t e gor y f

r om I V t o V I . S e e U . S . S . G . §4B 1. 1( b) . T he P S I a l s o r e c om m e nde d a th r e e - p o i n to f

f e n s e l e v e l r e d u c t i o n f

o ra c c e p t a n c e o f

r e s p o n s i b i l i ty . S e e U. S . S . G. §3 E 1. 1. W i th a t ot al offe nse l evel of 34 and a cri m i nal hi st ory c at egory of V I,5

P y ne ’ s G ui de l i ne s r a nge w a s 262 t o 327 m onths ’ i m pr i s onm e nt . P y ne f i l e d no obj ec t i on s t o t he P S I butm ov ed for a fi nd i ng thatthe G ui del i nes w er e unc ons t i tut i ona l , ba s e d on B l a ke l y v. W a s hi ngt on, 542 U . S . 296, 124 S . C t . 2531 (2 0 0 4 ), an d seek i n g t o b e sen t en ced w i th o u treg ard t o th e G u i d el i n es. A ts e nt e nc i ng, the di s tr i c tc our tove r rul e d P y ne ’ s B l a ke l y obj e c t i on a nd foun d t hatthe att em pt ed ho m e i nv as i on s w er e r el at ed, bu tthatthe ca re eroffe nd er p r o v is io n s till a p p lie d b e c a u s e th e s e c o n d o f f e n s e in v o lv e d a c r im e o f v io le n c e . T he di stri ctcourtthen effe ct i vel y gra nt ed a dow nw ar d d epar ture f rom cr i m i nal hi st ory c at egory l evel V I t o cat egory I V , fi nd i ng P yne’ s c ri m i nal hi st ory w as o v erst at ed , as fo l l o w s: D e s p ite m y f

in d in g o f a c a r e e ro f

f e n d e rs ta tu s in M r . P y n e ’s c a s e , I fi nd thatthe se nt ence ra ng e of 262 t o 3 27 m on ths ov erre pres ent s M r. P yne’ s c ri m i nal hi st ory. . . . M r. P yne has se vera l i nci dent s of c ri m i nal h is to r y , b u t th e y d o n o t r is e to th e le v e l in m y o p in io n to s u p p o r t a se nt ence i n t hatgu i del i ne ra ng e. W e have s t ol en prop er ty l es s than $1 00 , di sorder l y c on du ct , m i sdem ea no r, fi rs ton e w as a m i sdem ea no r, a tte m p te d h o m e in v a s io n , a n d b o th o f th e a tte m p te d h o m e in v a s io n s . . . i n v o l v e d M r . Py n e e n t e r i n g i n t o a r e s i d e n c e th a tw a s o w n e d b y s o me f a m i l y f r i e nd ors om e one tha the w a s c l os e t o a nd kne w a nd tha tno one w a s hom e dur i ng e i the ri nc i de nt . . . . A nd the f i r s thom e i nva s i on, he t ook $255 a nd a . . . bi c y c l e , a nd the s e c ond he t ook $85 a nd a backpack. I c an’ tfi nd thatthi s r i se s t o t he l evel t o sup po rta c ar ee r o f f e n d e rs e n te n c e . . . . A nd I c a n’ t , i n good c ons c i e nc e , s e nt e nc e s om e one t o e ve n 262 m on ths w i th t hatcr i m i nal hi st ory. S o I am go i ng t o d epar tdo w nw ar d f r o m th e g u id e lin e r a n g e in th is c a s e , a n d I d o s o f o rth o s e r e a s o n s . H ow e ve r , I a m gui de d i n the s e nt e nc e tha tI a m goi ng t o i m pos e by the offe nse l evel and cri m i nal hi st ory c at egory thatw ou l d app l y i f M r.6

P yne w as no tfoun d t o b e a ca re eroffe nd erand t hatw ou l d b e a n of f e ns e l e ve l of

33 w i th a c r i m i na l hi s t or y c a t e gor y of f our , s e nt e nc i ng ran g e o f 1 8 8 t o 2 3 5 m o n th s. A l tho ug h t he go vernm entobj ec t ed t o t he grantof a dow nw ar d d epar ture, the di stri ct c o u r t r e s p o n d e d th a t it w a s “f lo o r e d ” th a t th e a tte m p te d h o m e in v a s io n w o u ld qu al i fy as a c ri m e of vi ol ence for purpo se s of P yne’ s c ri m i nal hi st ory a nd , w hen c ons i de r i ng tha tc r i m e a nd P y ne ’ s “ othe rc r i m i na l hi s t or y , w hi c h c ons i s t s of nothi ng b u t m is d e m e a n o r s ,” th e c o u r t c o u ld n o t “in g o o d c o n s c ie n c e s e n te n c e th is m a n to 26 2 m on ths, and [w as ] no tgo i ng t o d o so. ” T h e d i stri ctco u rtsen t en ced P yn e t o co n cu rren tsen t en ces o f 2 0 0 m o n th s’ i m pr i s onm e ntf

orhi s drug c ons pi r a c y of f e ns e a nd 120 m onths ’ i m pr i s onm e ntf or hi s f i r e a r m s of

f e ns e . T he di s tr i c tc our tnot e d tha ti tha d “ c a r e f ul l y c ons i de r e d the f a c t or s s e touti n 18 U . S . C . [ §] 3553[ ( a ) ] , i nc l udi ng the a ppl i c a bl e gui de l i ne s a nd po l i cy st at em ent s i ss ued b y the S ent enci ng C om m i ss i on . ” T he di stri ctcourtst at ed thatthe i m po se d sent ence s w ou l d suffi ci ent l y pun i sh P yne f or hi s “ cr i m i nal cond uct w h ile a ls o s e r v in g a s a g e n e r a l a n d s p e c if ic d e te r r e n t to o th e r s w h o m ig h t e n g a g e in s im ila r - ty p e c o n d u c t.” P y n e a n d th e g o v e r n m e n ta p p e a l e d . On a p p e a l , P y n e r e q u e s t s th a twe r e m a nd f orr e s e nt e nc i ng, a r gui ng tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te r r e d by r e l y i ng on theIn Booker, the S up re m e Court held that B lakely applies to the United States Sentenc ing 2 Guide lin e s. Un ite d St ate s v . Ro drigue z, 3 98 F .3 d 1 29 1, 12 97 -9 8 ( 11 th C ir .) , c e rt . d e nie d, 12 5 S. Ct. 2935 (2005) . Although Py ne initially

argued that the district cour t erred i n light of B lakely , he supplemented his argument citing B ooker. 7 S ent enci ng G ui del i nes bec ause they w er e r endered uncon st i tut i on al by B oo ker. 2 T he gove r nm e nta r gue s tha ta ny B ooke re r r orw a s ha r m l e s s , butm a i nt a i ns tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te r r e d by r e f us i ng t o s e nt e nc e P y ne a s a c a r e e rof f e nde ra nd by g r a n t i n g th e d o wn wa r d d e p a r tu r e f r o m c r i m i n a l h i s t o r y c a t e g o r y VI t o c a t e g o r y I V. I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW B ec ause P yne t i m el y r ai se d h i s B l akel y obj ec t i on i n d i stri ctcourt , w e r evi ew h is B o o k e rc h a lle n g e to h is s e n te n c e d e n o v o , r e v e r s in g if th e g o v e r n m e n t f

a ils to s how tha ta ny e r r orw a s ha r m l e s s . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. P a z , 405 F . 3d 946, 948 (11t h C i r. 20 05 ). Wh e n r e v i e wi n g a d o wn wa r d d e p a r tu r e u n d e rth e S e n t e n c i n g Gu i d e l i n e s , we rev i ew factu al fi n d i n g s fo r cl ear erro r an d th e ap p l i cat i o n o f th e G u i d el i n es t o th o se f a c ts d e n o v o . U n ite d S ta te s v . K a p e lu s h n ik , 3 0 6 F .3 d 1 0 9 0 , 1 0 9 3 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) . I f th e r e i s a l e g a l b a s i s f

o rth e d o wn wa r d d e p a r tu r e u n d e rth e Gu i d e l i n e s , we ge ne r a l l y do notr e vi e w the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s e xe r c i s e of di s c r e t i on i n de t e r m i ni ng the ext entof the departure. U ni t ed S t at es v. H ea d, 17 8 F . 3d 12 05 , 12 06 n. 3 (11 th C i r. 19 99 ). I I I . DI S CU S S I ON8

A . B ook e r E r r or “U n d e rB o o k e r , th e r e a r e tw o k in d s o f s e n te n c in g e r r o r s : o n e is c ons t i tut i ona l a nd the othe ri s s t a tut or y . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D a c us , 408 F . 3d 686, 688 (11t h C i r. 20 05 ) ( per c uri am ). T he const i tut i on al error occurs “ w here un der a m a nda t or y gui de l i ne s s y s t e m a s e nt e nc e i s i nc r e a s e d be c a us e of a n e nha nc e m e nt ba s e d on f

a c t s f ound by the j udge tha tw e r e ne i the ra dm i t t e d by the de f e nda ntnor foun d b y the j ury. ” U ni t ed S t at es v. R od ri gu ez , 39 8 F . 3d 12 91 , 12 98 (11t h C i r. ), ce rt . deni ed, 12 5 S . C t . 29 35 (200 5) (e m ph as i s om i t t ed). T he st atut ory e rr or occurs w hen t he di stri ctcourtse nt ence s adefe nd ant“ un der a m andat ory G ui del i nes sc hem e, even i n t he abse nce of a Si xt h A m endm entenhancem entvi ol at i on . ” U ni t ed S t at es v. S hel t on , 40 0 F . 3d 13 25 , 13 30 -31 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ). P y ne c onc e de s tha tthe r e ha s be e n no c ons t i tut i ona l e r r ori n thi s c a s e , but a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tc om m i t t e d s t a tut or y B ooke re r r orw a r r a nt i ng re se nt enci ng . T he go vernm entagre es bo th t hatthere has bee n n o con st i tut i on al e r r o ra n d th a t s ta tu to r y B o o k e re r r o rd id o c c u r . T h u s , th e o n ly B o o k e ris s u e is w hether the go vernm entca rr i ed i t s burden t o sho w thatthe B oo ker e rr or w as ha r m l e s s . P a z , 405 F . 3d a t948. A B o o k e rs ta tu to r y e r r o ris h a r m le s s o n ly “if , v ie w in g th e p r o c e e d in g s in the i re nt i r e ty , a c our tde t e r m i ne s tha tthe e rr ordi d nota f f e c tthe s e nt e nc e , orha d but9

ve r y s l i ghte f

f e c t . I f one c a n s a y w i th f

a i ra s s ur a nc e tha tthe s e nt e nc e w a s not s ubs t a nt i a l l y s w a y e d by the e r r or , the s e nt e nc e i s due t o be a f f i r m e d e ve n though the r e w a s e r r or . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M a the ni a , 409 F . 3d 1289, 1292 ( 11th C i r . 2005) (percuri am ) ( qu ot at i on m arks, ci t at i on s a nd pu nctuat i on om i t t ed). H er e, the di stri ct c o u r t e x p r e s s e d g r e a t c o n c e r n a b o u t th e G u id e lin e s ’ m a n d a to r y r e q u ir e m e n t th a t it se nt ence P yne w i th t he ra ng e of 262 -327 m on ths. In fa ct , the di stri ctcourt fa shi on ed a uni qu e dow nw ar d d epar ture - - one no tautho ri ze d b y the G ui del i nes - - in a n e f f o r t to c ir c u m v e n t th e m a n d a to r y G u id e lin e s r a n g e o f 2 6 2 - 3 2 7 m o n th s . I t is a bunda nt l y c l e a rf

r om the s e nt e nc i ng r e c or d tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tw oul d ha ve co n si d ered an o th er sen t en ce b u tfo r th e m an d at o ry n atu re o f th e G u i d el i n es. T h u s, the go vernm enthas notshow n t hatthe B oo ker e rr or w as harm l es s, and w e there fore va c a t e P y ne ’ s s e nt e nc e a nd r e m a nd f orr e s e nt e nc i ng. B. G ui de l i ne s C a l c ul a t i o ns o n R e m a nd F ol l ow i ng B ooke r , di s tr i c tc our t s , w hi l e notbound by the S e nt e nc i ng G ui del i nes, m ustcont i nu e t o con sul tthe prov i si on s of the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes a nd c ons i de rthe m i n s e nt e nc i ng. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C r a w f or d, 407 F . 3d 1174, 1178 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ; U n ite d S ta te s v . J o r d i, 4 1 8 F .3 d 1 2 1 2 , 1 2 1 5 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . “T h is c o n s u lta tio n r e q u ir e m e n t, a t a m in im u m , o b lig e s th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to c a lc u la te c or r e c t l y the s e nt e nc i ng r a nge pr e s c r i be d by the G ui de l i ne s . ” C r a w f or d, 407 F . 3dU . S . S . G . § 4 A 1 . 3 (b ) ( 1 ) s t at e s : “ S T A N D A RD F O R

D O WNWA RD D E P A RT URE . —If 3 reliableinformation in d i cat es that the def endant’ s criminal history cate g ory substantially

overrepresents the seriousness of the de fenda nt’s criminal history

or the likelihood that the def endant will commit other c rimes, a downw ard departuremay be wa rra nted.” 10 at11 78 . F urther, “ [a ] m i si nt erpret at i on of the G ui del i nes by adi stri ctcourt ef fe ct i vel y m ea ns thatthe di stri ctcourthas notprop er l y c on sul t ed the G ui del i nes. ” I d. ( quot a t i on m a r ks , c i t a t i ons a nd punc tua t i on om i t t e d) . “ [ A ] ppl i c a t i on of the gu i del i nes i s notcom pl et e unt i l the departures , i f a ny, thatar e w arra nt ed ar e approp ri at el y c on si dere d. . . . If the di stri ctcourtfa i l ed i n [corr ec t l y app l yi ng the l aw in d e te r m in in g th e a p p lic a b ility o f th e d e p a r tu r e ], it b y n e c e s s ity f a ile d to p r o p e r ly consi der the gu i del i nes. ” J ordi , 41 8 F . 3d at12 15 . G i ven t hatthe go vernm enthas cr oss- appeal ed the di stri ctcourt ’ s dow nw ar d d epar ture a nd i t s f ai l ure t o con si der P y ne a s a c a r e e rof

f e nde r , w e di s c us s the s e tw o G ui de l i ne s i s s ue s i n or de rt o a l l ow th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to c a lc u la te p r o p e r ly th e G u id e lin e s r a n g e o n r e m a n d . F i rs t , w e a dd re ss the do w nw ar d d epar ture. T he go vernm enthas s ho w n t hat th er e w as n o leg ally p er m issib le b as is in th e G u id elin es fo r th e d istrict co u rt’s d o w n w a r d d e p a r tu r e f

r o m c r im in a l h is to r y c a te g o r y V I to c a te g o r y I V . W e re cogn i ze thatthe S ent enci ng G ui del i nes a l l ow for a do w nw ar d d epar ture w here

“ the de f e nda nt ’ s c r i m i na l hi s t or y c a t e gor y s ubs t a nt i a l l y ove r - r e pr e s e nt s the se ri ou snes s of the defendant ’ s c ri m i nal hi st ory. ” U . S . S . G . §4 A 1. 3(b)(1). 3 H ow ever , w here the defendanti s aca re eroffe nd er , such departure m ay no texce edU. S.S. G. §4 A1 .3 (b )( 3) (A) state s: “ LIMI TA TI ON ON EX TENTOF DOWNWARD 4 DE PARTURE F OR

CAREE R O F F ENDE R.—Th ee xtent of a do wnwa rd dep art ureun der t

his subsection for a

career offender w ithin the m eaning of §4B1.1 ( Career Off

ender) may

not exceed one criminal hist ory

cate g ory .” 11 on e c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory. U . S . S . G . § 4 A 1. 3(b)(3)(A ). M oreover, the di stri ct 4 c our te r r e d by ba s i ng i t s §4A 1. 3( b) ( 1) dow nw a r d de pa r tur e a tl e a s ti n pa r ton the u n d e r ly in g f

a c ts o f P y n e ’s p r io rc o n v ic tio n s , r a th e rth a n o n th e irtim in g o rp a tte r n . S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. R ucker, 17 1 F . 3d 13 59 , 13 63 (11t h C i r. 19 99 ) ( di stri ctcourt m a y notba s e a dow nw a r d de pa r tur e on the c our t ’ s vi e w tha tde f e nda nt ’ s pr i or conv i ct i on s i nv ol ved rel at i vel y m i no r c ri m es ). S ec on d, w e a dd re ss P yne’ s c l as si fi ca t i on as a c ar ee r off ender. U nd er U . S . S . G . § 4 B 1 . 1 , “ [a] d efen d an ti s a career o ffen d er i f (1 ) th e d efen d an tw as atl east e i ght e e n y e a r s ol d a tthe t i m e the de f e nda ntc om m i t t e d the i ns t a ntof f e ns e of c onvi c t i on; ( 2) the i ns t a ntof f e ns e of c onvi c t i on i s a f

e l ony tha ti s e i the ra c r i m e of v i o l e n c e o ra c o n tr o l l e d s u b s t a n c e o f f e n s e ; a n d ( 3 ) th e d e f

e n d a n th a s a tl e a s ttwo pri or fe l on y c on vi ct i on s of e i ther a cr i m e of vi ol ence or a c on trol l ed subst ance o f f e n s e . ” F o rp u rp o s e s o f

d e t e r m i n i n g c a r e e ro f

f e n d e rs t a tu s , a d e f

e n d a n th a s “ two pri or fe l on y c on vi ct i on s” i f ( 1) the defendant ’ s pri or conv i ct i on s w er e f or “ ei ther a cr i m e of vi ol ence or a c on trol l ed subst ance offe nse, ” a nd (2) “ the se nt ence s f or at l e a s ttw o of

the a f or e m e nt i one d f

e l ony c onvi c t i ons a r e c ount e d s e pa r a t e l y unde rthe prov i si on s of §4A 1. 1(a) , (b), or (c ). ” U . S . S . G . §4 B 1. 2(c) (e m ph as i s a dd ed).“Prior sentences imposed in related case s are to be treated as one sentence f or purpose s of 5 §4 A1 .1 (a), (b ), and

(c ). ”U. S.S. G. §4 A1 .2 (a)( 2) . Wh e retw o v iol e nt f e lonie s a rere late d, thefirs t is c ounte d und e r § 4A 1. 1( a), (b ), or (c ), whil ethese c on d is c ounte d und e r § 4A 1. 1( f) . Se ea lso U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, cmt. n. 3 (“Theprovisions of §4A1.2 (De finitions and Instructions for Computing 12 T hus , the c a r e e rof

f e nde rpr ovi s i on i n §4B 1. 2( c ) r e f e r s ba c k t o c ount i ng u n d er § 4 A 1 .1 , w h ich g o v er n s a ss es sm en t o f p o in ts to d eter m in e a d ef en d an t’ s cr i m i nal hi st ory c at egory. O nl y unrel at ed conv i ct i on s a re coun t ed se para t el y und er §4 A 1. 1(a) , (b), or (c ). U . S . S . G . §4 A 1. 2(a) (2). T here fore , t o q ual i fy for c ar ee r offe nd erst atus, P yne’ s tw o p ri or conv i ct i on s m ustbe un re l at ed. S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. D uty , 303 F . 3d 1240, 1241 ( 11th C i r . 2002) ( “ T o qua l i f y a s tw o pr i orf

e l ony c onvi c t i ons [ f

orthe purpos e of

c a r e e rof

f e nde rs t a tus ] , the pr i orof f e ns e s m us tbe unr e l a t e d” ) ; U ni t e d S t a t e s v. V a s que z , 389 F . 3d 65, 73 ( 2d C i r . 2004) ( “ ‘ r e l a t e d’ fe l on y c on vi ct i on s c ou ntas on e f or pu rposes of the ca re eroffe nd ergu i del i ne”) ; U ni t ed S t at es v. M ar t i ns, 41 3 F . 3d 13 9, 15 1 (1stC i r. 20 05 ) ( sa m e) . P y ne w a s c l a s s i f

i e d a s a c a r e e rof

f e nde rba s e d on hi s tw o pr i orc onvi c t i ons f o ra tte m p te d h o m e in v a s io n , o f f e n s e s th a t th e o r ig in a l P S I c la s s if ie d a s u n r e la te d . A l though the s e tw o f

e l oni e s a r e “ c r i m e s of

vi ol e nc e ” f

orpurpos e s of

the G ui del i nes, se e U . S . S . G . §4 B 1. 2(a) (2), there i s aqu es t i on i n t hi s c as e a s t o w hether the conv i ct i on s a re re l at ed and t hu s hi s s ent ence s on t hem ar e notcoun t ed se para t el y und er§4 A 1. 1(a) , (b) or ( c) , bu tra ther hi s s ec on d con vi ct i on i s c ou nt ed u n d e r§ 4 A 1 .1 ( f

) . 5Criminal History) are app l i cab le to the countingof convic tions under §4B 1.1 [i .e., the c are er

offender provision] .”). 13 A ts e nt e nc i ng, P y ne a r gue d tha thi s tw o pr i orc onvi c t i ons w e r e r e l a t e d f or the pu rpose of c om pu t i ng cr i m i nal hi st ory poi nt s bec ause the conv i ct i on s w er e c o n s o l i d a t e d f

o rs e n t e n c i n g . Th e PSI i n d i c a t e s th a t( 1 ) Py n e ’ s tw o a t t e mp t e d h o me i nva s i ons oc c ur r e d on A ugus t15, 1996, a nd A ugus t21, 1996, r e s pe c t i ve l y ; ( 2) P y ne w a s a r r e s t e d f

orthe s e of

f e ns e s on A ugus t22, 1996; a nd ( 3) the s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng f orboth of

f e ns e s w a s he l d on O c t obe r16, 1996. A c c or di ng t o the G ui del i nes, i n t he cont extof com pu t i ng cr i m i nal hi st ory poi nt s, “ [p] ri or se nt ence s ar e notconsi dere d rel at ed i f they w er e f or offe nses thatw er e s epar at ed by an i nt erveni ng arre st . . . . O therw i se , pri or se nt ence s a re consi dere d rel at ed i f they r e s u l t e d f

r o m o f f e n s e s th a t. . . we r e c o n s o l i d a t e d f o rtr i a l o rs e n t e n c i n g . ” U. S . S . G. § 4 A 1 .2 , c m t. n . 3 . Th e g o v e r n me n ta r g u e d th a td e s p i t e th e c o n s o l i d a t i o n o f Py n e ’ s tw o h o me i nva s i on f

e l oni e s f ors e nt e nc i ng, the of

f e ns e s w e r e s e pa r a t e d by a n i nt e r ve ni ng a r r e s ta nd s houl d the r e f or e be c l a s s i f

i e d a s unr e l a t e d c onvi c t i ons . T he go vernm ent ’ s a rgum entw as base d o n t he P S I’ s s t at em entthatP yne had been a r r e s t e d i n b e tw e e n h i s c o mmi s s i o n o f th e f i r s ta n d s e c o n d a t t e mp t e d h o me in v a s io n s . A c c o r d in g to th e P S I , o n A u g u s t 2 0 , 1 9 9 6 , p o lic e w e r e d is p a tc h e d toIn one plac e, the PSIstates incorrectly that the incident occurred on April 20, 1996; the 6 remainder of the PSI and the sentenc ing hearing make clea r that August 20, 1996 is the corre ct date. The district cour

t e xplained that the disorderly conduct c itation “is not an interveningevent 7 for pur poses of 4A1.1( f) . . . however, beca use the sec ond [attempted home invasion] is – or does constitute a crime of violence , it will be scora ble with one [criminal history] poi nt as opposed to the two that were g iven.” B ased on this chan ge, the district cour t assessed Py

ne with seven criminal history points, as opposed to the eight originally assessed by the P SI . See also U.S.S.G. §4A1.1(f ) (assigning onecriminal history point for a c rime of violenc e re lated to another crime alrea dy score d). 14 brea k u p a fi gh ti n w hi ch P yne w as i nv ol ved. O n O ct ob er22 , 19 96 , P yne pl ed 6 g u ilty to a d is o r d e r ly c o n d u c t c h a r g e a r is in g f r o m th e f ig h t a n d s e r v e d te n d a y s in c ounty j a i l . B e c a us e the f i ghtoc c ur r e d a f

t e rP y ne ’ s A ugus t15, 1996 of f e ns e but before hi s A ug ust21 , 19 96 offe nse, the go vernm entar gu ed thatthe tw o o ff ense s w e r e “ s e pa r a t e d by a n i nt e r ve ni ng a r r e s t ” a nd w e r e the r e f or e notr e l a t e d. A lth o u g h th e P S I lists A u g u st 2 0 , 1 9 9 6 as th e “d ate o f a rr es t” fo r P yn e’s di s or de r l y c onduc tc i t a t i on, the P r oba t i on O f f i c e ror a l l y c l a r i f

i e d a tthe s e nt e nc i ng hear i ng thatP yne w as never arre st ed for the A ug ust20 , 19 96 di sorder l y c on du ct i nci dent ; he w as m er el y c i t ed. B as ed on thi s t es t i m on y, the di stri ctcourtfoun d t hat the di s or de r l y c onduc tc i t a t i on di d notc ons t i tut e a n “ i nt e r ve ni ng a r r e s t ” a nd tha tthe tw o a tte m p te d h o m e in v a s io n s w e r e th e r e f o r e r e la te d . B ec ause P yne’ s tw o p ri or conv i ct i on s w er e r el at ed, the di stri ctcourtthen re du ce d P yne’ s c ri m i nal hi st ory poi nt s f rom ei gh tt o seven po i nt s. T he G ui del i nes 7 prob l em as t o P yne’ s c ar ee r off ender s t atus ar i se s bec ause the court ’ s hol di ng that15

P yne’ s pri or conv i ct i on s w er e “ re l at ed” f or pu rposes of ca l cul at i ng hi s c ri m i nal hi st ory poi nt s a l so po t ent i al l y i m pact s hi s c ar ee r off ender s t atus. T he di stri ctcourt appears t o h ave bel i eved thatw hether or notthe att em pt ed ho m e i nv as i on s w er e

“ r e l a t e d” a f

f e c t e d onl y the c a l c ul a t i on of P y ne ’ s c r i m i na l hi s t or y poi nt s a nd notthe d e te r m in a tio n o f

h is c a r e e ro f

f e n d e rs ta tu s . W e s a y pot e nt i a l l y be c a us e the r e i s s om e c onf us i on i n the r e c or d r e ga r di ng w h en o r w h eth er P yn e w as arrested fo r th e d i so rd erl y co n d u cto ffen se o r th e fi rst ho m e i nv as i on offe nse. T hi s c on fusi on m akes i tun cl ea r w hether P yne’ s a t t em pt ed hom e i nva s i ons w e r e s e pa r a t e d by a n i nt e r ve ni ng a r r e s ta nd the r e f or e w he the rthe of f e ns e s w e r e unr e l a t e d orr e l a t e d. T he r e i s a l s o unc e r t a i nty a s t o w he the ra ny of P y ne ’ s othe rc onvi c t i ons tha n the a t t e m pt e d hom e i nva s i ons w oul d qua l i f y P y ne f or c a r e e rof f e nde rs t a tus . B e c a us e the r e i s a m bi gui ty i n the r e c or d c onc e r ni ng the circ u m stan ce s o f P yn e’s p rio r c o n v icti o n s a n d co n ce rn in g th e d istrict co u rt’s r e l e va ntf

i ndi ngs , w e c onc l ude tha tthe c a r e e rof f e nde ri s s ue s houl d be a ddr e s s e d by the di stri ctcourti n t he fi rs ti nst ance atthe new se nt enci ng hear i ng . B ot h p ar t i es shou l d b e gi ven t he op po rtun i ty on rem and t o p re se ntanew evi dence and bri ef s re l evantt o w hether P yne has tw o p ri or conv i ct i on s thatqu al i fyhi m for c ar ee r o ffen d er st atu s. I V . CONCL US I ONWe do not decide the rea sonablene ss of any particula r sentence in this case , whether falling 8 within a properly

calculated Guidelines rang e or not. F urther, nothinghere in should be construed as indicatingwhether Py

ne is or is not a career

offender; that issue should be reviewe d ab initio by thedis tric t c ourt . 16 I n s um m a r y , be c a us e the di s tr i c tc our tc om m i t t e d s t a tut or y B ooke re r r ora nd the go vernm entdi d n otshow thaterror t o b e har m l es s, w e vac at e P yne’ s s ent ence in its e n tir e ty a n d r e m a n d f o rr e s e n te n c in g u n d e ra n a d v is o r y G u id e lin e s r e g im e . O n r e m a nd the di s tr i c tc our ts ha l l de t e r m i ne w he the rP y ne i s a c a r e e rof f e nde ra nd s ha l l pr ope r l y c a l c ul a t e the G ui de l i ne s r a nge i n a c c or da nc e w i th tha tf i ndi ng. T he di stri ctcourtshal l then sent ence P yne und eran advi sory G ui del i nes r egi m e, c o n s id e r in g b o th th e p r o p e r ly c a lc u la te d G u id e lin e s r a n g e a n d o th e rs ta tu to r ily pe r m i s s i bl e s e nt e nc i ng c ons i de r a t i ons . S e e 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) ; B ooke r , 125 S . C t . a t757. 8

V AC AT E D a n d RE MAND E D.