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 11-23-2007 

# U SA v . C r a ve nor 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 . 06-3506

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git 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 ght 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 git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept 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 git al Reposit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . 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 . C r a ve nor " (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 201. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/201NOT 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- 3506 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. W I LL I AM CRAVENOR, A ppel l ant 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 . C r i m i nal N o. 05- cr - 00316- 2) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e G us t ave D i amond Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

O ct ober31, 2007 B efore: R E N D E L L and N Y G A A R D , C i rcui tJudg es,

and M cC L U R E , D i s t r i ctJ udge. ( Fi l ed: N ovember 23, 2007) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

* H onor abl e J ames F. M cC l ur e, J r . , Seni orJ udge of the U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ct C our tJ udge fort he M i ddl e D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, s i t t i ng bydes i gnat i on.2

R E N D E L L , C i r cui tJudge . 

### W i l l i am Cr ave nor

a ppe a l s fr om

the s e nt e nc e i m

pos e d by the Di s tri c t

Court of 27 m onths of i nc ar c e r at i on a ft e r Cr ave nor

pl e d gui l ty

t o one c ount

of knowi ngl y

bart e ri ng and di s pos i ng of fi r e arm s , i n vi ol at i on of 18 U. S. C. §922( j) . I n part i c ul ar , Cr ave nor cl ai m s that the Distri ct

Co urt i m prop erly applie d U .S.S.G. §2K .2.1(b), a four- le vel enhancem ent for po ss es si onof a fir earm in conn ec ti onwith another fel ony of fense, wh en hec om put e d thea

pp r op ri at e Se nt e nc i ngGu i de l i ner ang e . W e r e vi e w de no vo a Dis tric t C o urt’s interp retatio no f

th e Gu id elin es. See Uni te d States v . Bati s ta DeLa Cruz , 460 F .3 d4 6 6 , 4 6 8 (3 dC ir. 2 0 0 6 ). F o r th e reaso n s th at f o llo w , w e w ill aff

i r m t he s ent ence im p o se d b yth e D istric t C o u rt. O n A ugus t31, 2004, C r avenorr ece i ved fourt een s t ol en fi r earm s fr om hi s codefe ndantC ur t i s Shaffe r . O n Sept ember 1, 2004, he tr ans ferr ed thi r t een of t hes e s t ol en w eapons t o know n drug deal er s i n excha nge for$500 cas h and ei ght y - fours t amp bags of her oi n. C r avenorr et ai ned one of t he s t ol en fi r earm s forhi s per s onal us e. A ft err etur ni ng to h is r esid en ce , C rav en o r ga v e the ca sh an d h ero in to h is co -de fe n d an t Sh af fe r. Shaffe r t hen r etur ned s i x ors even s t amp bags a nd $100 t o C r avenorforhi s r ol e i n s el l i ng t he s t ol en fi r earm s . Fol l ow i ng hi s arr es t , C r avenorpl ed gui l t yt o know i ngl ybar t er i ng and d is p o s in g o f

f ir e a rm s , a v io la tio n o f

1 8 U .S .C . § 9 2 2 (j ). T he D i s t r i ctC our tcal cul at ed C r avenor ’ s G ui del i ne Sent enci ng r ange a s 27 t o 33 m o n th s ’ i m p ri s o n m e n t, b a s e d in p a rt o n a p p lic a tio n o f a n e n h a n c e m e n t u n d e r U .S .S .G . §3

2K 2. 1( b) ( 5) . T he D i s t r i ctC our tcons i der ed s ever al of the fa ct or s found i n 18 U . S. C . §§ 3 5 5 3 (a ) a n d d e te rm in e d th a t 2 7 m o n th s w a s a n a p p ro p ri a te s e n te n c e . T he s ol e ques t i on r ai s ed on appe al i s t he pr opr i etyof the four - l evel enhanc ement u n d e r § 2 K 2 .1 (b )(5 ). C ra v e n o r a rg u e s th a t th e D istric t C o u rt im p ro p e rlya p p lied th is enhanc ement beca us e the i tus ed the s ame offens e t o cal cul at e the bas e off ens e l evel and to im p o se a f

o u r-le v e l en h a n c e m e n t. W e d isa g re e . U .S .S .G . § 2 K 2 .1 (b ) p ro v id e s th a t a fo u r-l ev el en h an ce m en t sho u ld b e a p p li ed if a d ef en d an t “us ed o r po sses sed an yfirearm oramm uni t i on i n connec t i on w i t h anotherfel onyoffe ns e; or , pos s es s ed ort r ans ferr ed any fi r earm oramm uni t i on w i t h know l edge, i nt ent , orr eas on t o bel i eve t hati tw oul d be us ed orpos s es s ed i n connec t i on w i t h anotherfel onyoffe ns e. ” The D i s t r i ctC our tappl i ed § 2K 2. 1( b) beca us e i tfound C r avenorpos s es s ed a f i r earm i n connec t i on w i t h “another f e l o n yo f f e n s e , ” t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f h e r o i n t o h i s c o - d e f

e n d a n t , i n v i o l a t i o n o f

2 1 U. S . C. § 8 4 1 (a ). T his C ou rthas est abli shed a tw o-partt estt o d et erm i ne w hetheran o ffen se c o m m itte d m a ys u p p o rt a n e n h a n c e m e n t u n d e r § 2 K 2 .1 (b ). U nit ed S t ates v. N

ava rro , 476 F . 3 d 1 8 8 , 1 9 6 ( 3 d Ci r . 2 0 0 7 ) . Th e f i r s tp a r to f

t h e t e s ts t e ms f

r o m B l ockbur

gerv. U ni t ed St at es , 2 8 4 U. S . 2 9 9 ( 1 9 3 2 ) , a n d r e q u i r e s t h a tt h e p r e d i c a t e o f f e n s e a n d t h e f

i r e a r ms p o s s e s s io n c ri m e e a c h h a v e a n e le m e n t th a t is n o t s h a re d b yth e o th e r. N ava rro , 476 F. 3d at196. T he s econd pr ong of the t es ti s fac tual i n natur e and a s ks w hetherm or e than the m e re -p o s s e s s io n o f

th e f ir e a rm w a s a n in te g ra l a s p e c t o f th e p re d ic a te o f

f e n s e . I d.4

U n d e r t h is te s t, it is c le a r t h a t th e D is tr ic t C o u rt p ro p e rl ya p p lie d th e e n h a n c e m e n t. E ach of t he off ens es - bar t er i ng i n fi r earm s and di s t r i but i on of a c ont r ol l ed subst ance-requi re pr oo f of an elem ent that the o t her doe s not and t hu s sat i sfyt he fir st pr ong of the N

ava rro te s t. N

a v a r r o , 476 F. 3d at196- 97 ( compar i ng 21 U . S. C . §841( a) w i t h 18 U . S. C . §922( g) ) . T he off ens e of drug di s t r i but i on does notr equi r e an e xchange o f s o m e th in g o f

v a lu e . I d. at196 ( ci t i ng U

ni t ed Stat es v. C oady, 80 9 F . 2d 11 9, 12 4 (1st C i r . 1987) ) . T her efor e, w hen C r avenorgave the her oi n t hathe had r ece i ved i n excha nge fort he s t ol en w eapons t o hi s co- defe ndant , he comm i t t ed the off ens e of di s t r i but i ng a c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e . H avi ng det er m i ned thatdrug di s t r i but i on qual i fi es as “anotherfel onyoffe ns e” f or p u rpo ses o f § 2 K 2 . 1 (b)(5 ), w e m u st th en d eterm ine w h ethe r m o re tha n the m ere p o sses sion o f th e f

ir ea rm w as a n integ ral asp ec t of the p red icate o ff

en se. C rav en o r’s pos s es s i on of the fi r earm w as notan i nt egr al par tof the cr i m e of drug di s t r i but i on. T he fel onyoffe ns e us ed byt he D i s t r i ctC our tt o appl yU . S. S. G . §2K 2. 1( b) ( 5) “ca nnotbe deemed t he func t i onal equi val entof a ‘ fi r earm s pos s es s i on offe ns e. ’ ” N ava rro , 476 F. 3d at196 ( s t at i ng “[d] i s pens at i on of a c ont r ol l ed s ubs t ance i s an el ement of drug di s t r i but i on b u tn o to f

f i r e a r ms p o s s e s s i o n ; p o s s e s s i o n o f a f i r e a r m i s a n e l e me n to f

f i r e a r ms p o ss e ss io n b u t n o t o f

d ru g d istrib u tio n ” ). T h u s, b o th p ro n g s o f th e tes t p ro m u lg a ted in N ava rro a re s a tis f

ie d , a n d th e D is tr ic t C o u rt p ro p e rl ya p p lie d th e e n h a n c e m e n t. For t he for egoi ng r eas ons , w e w i l l aff i r m t he s ent ence i m pos ed i n t he J udgm ent a n d C o m m itm e n t O rd e r o f th e D istric t C o u rt.