2007 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit
8-30-2007 

# U SA v . M c C ormick
P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 06-1251

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2007 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. F or mor e infor m at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du
. Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . M c C or mick " (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 520. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/520NO T P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT
N o. 06- 1251
U N I T E D STA TE S OF AM ERI CA

v. J AMES A. MCCORM I CK, Ap pe lla nt.

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D
. C
. N o. 04- cr - 00215) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H on. G ar yL
. L anca s t er
Subm i t t ed underT hi r d C i r cui t L A R 34. 1( a)

on M ay18, 2007 B efor e: FI SH E R and R O T H , C i r cui t J udges R A M B O *, D i s t r i ctJ udge ( O pi ni on fi l ed A ugus t 30, 2007)

O P I N I O N

* J udge Sy l vi a H
. R ambo, U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctJ udge fort he M i ddl e D i s t r i ctof P e n n s y lv a n ia , s ittin g b yd e s ig n a tio n .

### T h e D istrict C o urt f o un dth at M cC o rm icksu f f eredf ro m num ero u s p h y sical, 1 

### e m ot i ona l , and m e nt a la i l m e nt s i n a ddi t i on t o hi s s e ve r e a l c ohola ddi c t i on. 2 RO TH , C i r cui t J udge: T h e iss u e p re se n ted in th is a p p e a l is w h e th e r th e D istric t C o u rt c o m p lied w ith R u le 32( i ) ( 3) of t he Feder al R ul es of C r i m i nal Pr ocedur e r egar di ng obj ect i ons r ai s ed byt he defe ndantJ ames M cC or m i ck t o hi s pr es ent ence r epor t . M cC or m i ck al l eges t hatt he D istric t C o u rt, i n v io latio n o f R u le 3 2 (i)(3 ), f

a iled to re so lv e o r e x p re ss lyd isc laim
r el i ance on fac t s i n t he pr es ent ence r epor t t hatM cC or m i ck di s put ed. For t he r eas ons s et f o rth b e lo w , w e c o n c lu d e th a t th e D istric t C o u rt c o m p lied w ith R u le 3 2 (i)(3 ), an d w e w ill aff i r m i t s j udgm entof s ent ence . I . B ackground an d P roce dural H i s t ory O n A u g u st 2 4 , 2 0 0 4 , M c C o rm ick w a s c h a rg e d w ith o n e c o u n t o f b a n k ro b b e ryin vi ol at i on of 18 U
. S. C
. § 2113( a)
. O n J ul y22, 2005, he ent er ed a pl ea of no l o co ntendre t o t hi s char ge. B ot h M cC or m i ck and the governm entr evi ew ed M cC or m i ck’ s pr es ent ence
r e p o r t , b u t o n l yM c Co r mi c k f i l e d o b j e c t i o n s c h a l l e n g i n g c e r t a i n p o r t i o n s o f t h e r e p o r t . At t he s ent enci ng hear i ng, t he D i s t r i ctC our t acc ept ed onl yone of M cC or m i ck’ s obj ect i ons
w hi ch l ow er ed hi s bas e off ens e l evel byt hr ee poi nt s . W i t h t hat , and one otheraddi t i onal fi ndi ng, t he D i s t r i ctC our t adopt ed t he fi ndi ngs of t he pr es ent ence r epor t . G i ven

1 M cC or m i ck’ s offe ns e l evel and cr i m i nal hi s t or y , hi s advi s or ygui del i nes s ent ence w as 46 to 5 7 m o n th s . A f

te r t a k in g in to c o n s id e ra tio n th e s e n te n c in g f a c to rs u n d e r 1 8 U .S .C . §3

3553( a) , t he D i s t r i ctC our t i m pos ed on M cC or m i ck a s ent ence of 46 m ont hs
. M cC or m i ck tim e lyf iled th is a p p e a l. I I . Juri s di ct i on and St andard of R evi ew T h e D is tr ic t C o u rt h a d ju ri s d ic tio n o v e r t h is m a tte r p u rs u a n t to 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 2 3 1
. T h is C o u rt h a s a p p e lla te ju ri s d ic tio n p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1
. I n an appe al of t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s al l eged vi ol at i on of R ul e 32( i ) ( 3) , w e gr ant p le n a ry re v ie w . U

ni t ed St at es v. E l ectr odyne Sy s . C or p. , 1 4 7 F
. 3 d 2 5 0 , 2 5 2 (3d C ir
. 1 9 9 8 ). II I. A n a ly sis R ul e 32( i ) ( 3) s t at es t hat , ats ent enci ng, a cour t “must , foranydi s put ed por t i on of th e p re se n ten c e re p o rt o r o th e r c o n tro v e rte d m a tter, ru le o n th e d isp u te o r d e ter m in e th a t a
r ul i ng i s unnece s s ar yei t herbeca us e t he mat t erw i l l not aff ects ent enci ng, or beca us e t he
cour t w i l l not cons i dert he mat t eri n s ent enci ng. ” A l t hough R ul e 32( i ) ( 1) al l ow s t he
c o u rt to a d o p t an yu n d isp u ted p o rtio n o f th e p re se n ten c e re p o rt a s a f in d in g o f f a c t, i t
m us t m ake a n expr es s fi ndi ng on a di s put ed fa ctor di s cl ai m r el i ance upon a di s put ed fa ct in s e n te n c in g a d e f

e n d a n t. E l ectr odyne Sy s . C or p. , 1 4 7 F .3 d a t 2 5 5
. H ere , M cC o rm ick a ll eg es th at t h e o b jecti o n s h e f

il ed to the p rese n tenc e re p o rt
r ai s ed fa ctual di s put es t hatw er e notexpr es s l yr es ol ved ordi s cl ai m ed byt he D i s t r i ct C our t . A l t hough he fi l ed a gr eatnum berof obj ect i ons t o al m os t everypar agr aph of the pr es ent ence r epor t , as M cC or m i ck conc edes , m anyof t hes e do notr ai s e anydi s put es of4

f a c t an d n e e d n o t h a v e b e e n a d d re ss e d b yth e D istric t C o u rt. In its se n ten c in g tra n sc rip t, the D istri ct C o u rtsp ec ifi ca ll ystat ed that “itad o p ted th e f ind ing s o f th e p rese n tenc e re p o rt
w i t h j us t t w o m odi fi cat i ons : ( 1) i t w oul d favor abl ygr anta t hr ee- poi nt r educt i on for
ac ce p tanc e o f re sp o n sibil ityan d (2) M cC o rm ick h ad n u m ero u s ail m en ts. ” T h e c o u rt d e te rm in e d , h o w e v e r, t h a t in s p ite o f th e s e a ilm e n ts it w o u ld g iv e n o a d d itio n a l d e p a rt u re . W e c o n c lu d e f

ro m th e a b o v e th a t th e D istric t C o u rt re so lv e d th e o b jec tio n s, re

jec tin g a ll b u t tw o o f

th e m , a n d w a s n o t in v io la tio n o f R u le 3 2 (i )( 3 ). I V . C oncl usi on F o r th e re a so n s s e t f

o rth a b o v e , w e w ill af

f i rm t he j udgm entof s ent ence .