FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT JULY 14, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ 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. 05- 11355 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 04 -001 45 -C R -J E C -1 U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s S A M U E L M O O R E , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e rn D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( Ju l y 14, 2006) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: S a m ue l M oor e appe a l s hi s c onvi c t i on a nd 120- m onth s e nt e nc e f orba nk2

r o b b e ry i n v o l v i n g th e u s e o f a d a n g e r o u s w e ap o n , i n v i o l a t i o n o f 1 8 U . S. C. § 2 11 3(a) , (d). H e r ai se s f ou r i ss ues. F i rs t , M oo re ar gu es thatthe evi dence w as i ns uf f i c i e ntt o s uppor thi s c onvi c t i on f orba nk r obbe ry . H e c ont e nds tha tthe ey ew i tness es di d n oti dent i fy hi m fr om a pho t o l i neup and thathe di d n otm at ch th ei r p h ysi cal d escri p t i o n s o f th e ro b b er. M o o re arg u es th atth e g o v ern m en t ’ s case r e l i e d he a vi l y on the t e s t i m ony pr ovi de d by hi s e x- gi r l f r i e nd C ry s t a l M i t c he l l a nd form erroom m at e R andal l P . D ov e, w hi ch w as i ncon si st entw i th the robb ery eyew i tn esses. S e c ond, M oor e a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d unde rR ul e s 401, 402, a nd 403 of the F e de r a l R ul e s of

E vi de nc e by a dm i tt i ng the f i nge rpr i nte vi de nc e f

r om the a i rpi s t ol pa c ka ge be c a us e the r e w a s no e vi de nc e tha tc onne c t e d the a i rpi s t ol fr om thatpackage w i th the gu n the bank t el l ersa w du ri ng the robb ery. M oo re a r gue s tha tthe f

i nge rpr i nte vi de nc e w a s notr e l e va ntunde rR ul e 401 be c a us e the go vernm entdi d n otconn ec tthe ai r pi st ol t o the bank robb ery by e l i ci t i ng w hether the type of pi st ol i n the package w as si m i l art o the pi st ol thatH ay nes s aw . M oo re a ls o a r g u e s th a t th e c o u r t s h o u ld h a v e e x c lu d e d th e f in g e rp r in t e v id e n c e u n d e rR u le 403 be c a us e the a i rpi s t ol pa c ka ge ha d m i ni m a l pr oba t i ve va l ue gi ve n the l a c k of e vi de nc e c onne c t i ng i tt o the r obbe ry . H e f ur the rc l a i m s tha tthe a i rpi s t ol packagi ng had a hi gh dang erof un fa i r pre j ud i ce because the j ury c ou l d i nferthat3

M oor e us e d the pi s t ol i n the r obbe ry be c a us e hi s f i nge rpr i ntw a s f

ound on the ou t si de of the package. T hi rd, M oo re ar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourterre d u nd erU ni t ed Stat es v. B oo ke r , 5 4 3 U .S . 2 2 0 , 1 2 5 S . C t. 7 3 8 , 1 6 0 L . E d . 2 d 6 2 1 ( 2 0 0 5 ) , b y e n h a n c in g h is sen t en ce fo r o b stru ct i o n o f j u st i ce b ased o n fact s ab o u tth e h i g h -sp eed car ch ase tha toc c urr e d a f

t e rthe ba nk r obbe ry tha tw e r e notr e f l e c t e d i n the j ury ve r di c tor a d mi tt e d b y h i m. F in a lly , M o o r e a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t f a ile d to p r o p e r ly c a lc u la te h is c r im in a l h is to ry c a te g o ry a n d g u id e lin e r a n g e c o rr e c tly . M o o r e c o n te n d s th a t it is i m po ss i bl e t o d educe fr om the se nt enci ng tra nscr i ptho w the di stri ctcourt ca l cul at ed a c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory of I V . M oo re cont ends thatthe di stri ctcourt appe a r s t o ha ve s us t a i ne d hi s obj e c t i on t o the i nc l us i on of a 1995 dr i vi ng unde rthe i nfl uence (“ D U I” ) c on vi ct i on , w hi ch w ou l d h ave r em ov ed on e c ri m i nal hi st ory p o in t a n d r e d u c e d h is c r im in a l h is to ry c a te g o ry to I I I . I. W e g e n e r a lly r e v ie w d e n o v o w h e th e re v id e n c e is s u f f ic ie n t f o ra g u ilty ve r di c t , “ vi e w i ng the e vi de nc e i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o the gove rnm e nta nd draw i ng al l re as on abl e i nfer ence s i n favor of the j ury’ s ver di ct . ” U ni t ed Stat es v. C a stro , 89 F . 3d 1443, 1450 ( 11th C i r . 1996) . “ T he e vi de nc e i s s uf f i c i e nts o l ong4

a s a r e a s onabl e tr i e rof

f a c t , c hoos i ng a m ong r e a s onabl e i nt e rpr e t a t i ons of the evi dence, coul d fi nd gu i l tbeyond a r ea sonabl e dou bt . ” U n i t ed S ta t es v. P i n ei ro , 3 8 9 F .3 d 1 3 5 9 , 1 3 6 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . D e te r m in a tio n s o f w itn e s s c r e d ib ility f

a ll w i thi n the j ury ’ s e xc l us i ve pr ovi nc e a nd m a y notbe r e vi s i t e d unl e s s the t e s t i m ony i s “ i ncre di bl e a s am att erof l aw . ” U ni t e d Stat e s v . C alde r on , 127 F . 3d 1314, 1325 ( 11th C i r . 1997) . I n or de rt o be i nc r e di bl e a s a m a tt e rof l a w , “ [ i ] tm us tbe t es t i m on y a s t o fac t s thatthe w i tness ph ys i ca l l y c ou l d n othave po ss i bl y observed or event s thatcoul d n othave occurre d u nd erthe l aw s of nature. ” I d. ( quot a t i ons om i tt ed). H e r e , M oor e a r gue s tha tthe e vi de nc e w a s i ns uf f i c i e ntt o pr ove he w a s the p e r s o n w h o r o b b e d th e b a n k . V ie w in g a ll th e e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to th e g o v er n m en t an d d ra w in g all rea so n ab le in fe re n ce s in fa v o r o f th e ju ry ’s ve r di c t , the e vi de nc e he r e w a s s uf f i c i e ntt o s uppor tthe j ury ’ s ve r di c t . V i c ky H a y n e s , th e b a n k te lle r , te s tif ie d th a t a m a n w e a r in g a d a r k s h o r t s le e v e p o lo s h ir t, b lu e je a n s , a n d a d a r k b a s e b a ll c ap ap p r o a c h e d h e rte lle rw in d o w , p u s h e d a w h ite b a g w ith r e d le tte r s in f

r o n t o f h e r , a n d s a id “f

ill it w ith m o n e y ” a n d “I ’v e g o t a gun. ” H a y ne s t e s t i f

i e d tha tthe m a n r a i s e d hi s s hi r ta nd s he s a w a gun i n the w ai stband of hi s pant s. H ay nes t es t i fi ed attri al thatshe w as 99 perc entsure that M oo re w as the robb er . B oth H ay nes a nd K ei sha T ay l or, a bank cust om er , t es t i fi ed5

th a t th e r o b b e rh a d s o m e s o r t o f m a r k o rs c a ro n h is f

a c e , w h ic h is c o n s is te n t w ith M i t ch el l ’ s t est i m o n y th atM o o re h ad a m o l e rem o v ed fro m h i s l eftch eek . T h u s, the t es t i m on y f

rom ey ew i tness es supp ort ed a r ea sonabl e i nfer ence thatthe robb er w as M oo re . T he t es t i m on y f

rom M i t chel l and D ov e a l so supp ort ed a f i nd i ng thatM oo re w a s the r obbe r . M i t c he l l t e s t i f i e d tha tM oor e w a s gone w he n s he w oke on J une 7, 20 02 , and l ef

ta not e s ay i ng thathe had g on e t o w as h h er19 90 G ray C hevrol et C a v a lie r . M itc h e ll te s tif ie d th a t M o o r e d id n o t r e tu rn f o rs e v e r a l d a y s . M itc h e ll i dent i fi ed M oo re fr om the bank survei l l ance ph ot og raph s bas ed on the w ay he w as s t a ndi ng w i th hi s r i ghtf ootove rhi s l e f

tf oot , the c l othi ng he w a s w e a r i ng i n the pi c tur e , a nd hi s ha i rc ut . M i t c he l l a l s o t e s t i f i e d tha tM oor e a c t e d ne r vous w he n s he ne xts a w hi m a nd t ol d he rtha the ha d done s om e thi ng w r ong. D ove t e s t i f

i e d tha tM oor e w a s gone f r om the tr a i l e rw he n he r e turne d f r om w o r k o n J u n e 7 , a n d r e tu rn e d f o u ro rf iv e d a y s la te rw ith o u t th e g r a y C a v a lie r . D ov e a l so st at ed thatM oo re ac t ed nervou s w hen h e r eturned. D ov e t es t i fi ed that M o o r e c o n f

e s s e d to h im ab o u t r o b b in g a b a n k u s in g a g r o c e ry b a g . A c c o r d in g to D o v e, M o o re t o l d h i m o f th e p o l i ce ch ase an d o f p ark i n g th e car b eh i n d a h o u se a nd runni ng. D ove t e s t i f i e d tha tM oor e s how e d hi m the ba nk he r obbe d, the gun he used, and the bag w i th the m on ey . A l tho ug h D ov e had pri or cr i m i nal6

c o n v ic tio n s a n d a s e x u a l r e la tio n s h ip w ith M itc h e ll, th e ju ry w a s e n title d to c r e d it th ei r t est i m o n y. T h e st at em en t s b y M i t ch el l an d D o v e are n o t“ i n cred i b l e as a m a tte ro f la w ,” a n d th u s s u p p o r t th e ju ry ’s v e r d ic t. Se e C alde r on , 12 7 F . 3d at 1325. O ther e vi dence al so supp ort ed the j ury’ s ver di ct . B oth T erri Jordan, an as si st antbranch m anager a tthe bank , and T ay l or t es t i fi ed thatthey s aw the robb er l e a ve i n a gr a y c a rtha tm a t c he d the phy s i c a l de s c r i pt i on of M i t c he l l ’ s c a r , w hi c h, a c c o r d in g to M itc h e ll, M o o r e to o k th e m o rn in g o f th e r o b b e ry . Z a c h a ry L u n a , a de puty a tthe C he r oke e C ounty s he r i f f’ s of f i c e , t e s t i f i e d tha the e nga ge d i n a hi gh spee d chase w i th the suspec t ed bank robb erw ho w as dri vi ng a gra y C hevrol et C a va l i e rtha ta l s o m a t c he d the de s c r i pt i on of M i t c he l l ’ s c a r . D e t e c t i ve J os e ph M c D o n a ld f

r o m th e C h e r o k e e C o u n ty s h e r if f’s o f f ic e te s tif ie d th a t h e r e s p o n d e d to a c i t i z e n’ s r e por tof

a gr a y 1990 C he vr ol e tC a va l i e rpa r ke d i n hi s ba c k y a r d a nd a s e a r c h of the ve hi c l e r e ve a l e d pl a s t i c pa c ka gi ng f ora n a i rpi s t ol . F i nge rpr i nt s f r om th e a irp is to l p a c k a g in g m a tc h e d M o o r e ’s . A ll o f th e e v id e n c e , ta k e n to g e th e r , is m o r e th a n s u f

f ic ie n t to s u s ta in M o o r e ’s g u ilty v e r d ic t. II . M oor e a r gue s tha tthe f i nge rpr i nte vi de nc e s houl d be e xc l ude d a s i rr e l e va nt or l ac ki ng enou gh prob at i ve val ue t o o verc om e i t s unfai r pre j ud i ce un der R ul es7

40 1, 40 2, and 4 03 of the F eder al R ul es of E vi dence. W e genera l l y r evi ew a di stri ct c o u r t’s e v id e n tia ry ru lin g s f o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . U

ni t ed Stat es v. W

alke r , 59 F . 3d 1196, 1198 ( 11th C i r . 1995) . H ow e ve r , w he r e a de f e nda ntr a i s e s a c l a i m of e vi de nt i a ry e rr orf

orthe f i r s tt i m e on appe a l , a s i s the c a s e he r e , w e r e vi e w f or pl ai n err or, “ corr ec t [i ng ] on l y f or errors thatar e part i cul ar l y e gregi ou s a nd that seri o u sl y affect th e fai rn ess, i n t eg ri ty o r p u b l i c rep u t at i o n o f j u d i ci al p ro ceed i n g s, and then o nl y w hen a m i sc arri age of j ust i ce w ou l d res ul t . ” U ni t ed Sa t es v. J e r ni gan , 341 F . 3d 1273, 1280 ( 11th C i r . 2003) . R e l e va nte vi de nc e i s de f i ne d a s “ e vi de nc e ha vi ng a ny t e nde nc y t o m a ke the exi st ence of any f

ac tthati s of c on se qu ence t o the det erm i nat i on of the ac t i on m ore pr obabl e orl e s s pr obabl e tha n i tw oul d be w i thoutthe e vi de nc e . ” F e d. R . E vi d. 40 1. E vi dence w hi ch i s notre l evanti s notadm i ss i bl e. F ed. R . E vi d. 40 2. H er e, th e f in g e rp r in t o n th e a irp is to l p a c k a g in g f o u n d in M itc h e ll’s c a ris r e le v a n t to show thatM oo re w as l i kel y the pers on se en dri vi ng the get aw ay ca r. A d is tr ic t c o u r t m a y e x c lu d e r e le v a n t e v id e n c e w h e n “its p r o b a tiv e v a lu e is su b st an t i al l y o u tw ei g h ed b y th e d an g er o f u n fai r p rej u d i ce, co n fu si o n o f th e i ssu es, orm i s l e a di ng the j ury , orby c ons i de r a t i ons of undue de l a y , w a s t e of

t i m e , or ne e dl e s s pr e s e nt a t i on of c um ul a t i ve e vi de nc e . ” F e d. R . E vi d. 403. I n r e vi e w i ng a R ul e 403 i s s ue , w e vi e w “ the e vi de nc e i n a l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o i t s a dm i s s i on,8

m axi m i zi ng i t s probat i ve val ue and m i ni m i zi ng i t s und ue prej ud i ci al i m pact . ” U ni t e d Stat e s v . J

e r ni gan , 341 F . 3d 1273, 1284 ( 11th C i r . 2003) ( quot a t i ons o m itte d ) . T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d note rrunde rR ul e s 401, 402, or403 by a dm i tt i ng the f i nge rpr i nte vi de nc e f

ound on the a i rpi s t ol pa c ka gi ng. T he e vi de nc e i s r e l e va ntf or id e n tif ic a tio n p u rp o s e s . M o o r e a ls o f a ils to s h o w th a t th is e v id e n c e is u n d u ly p r e ju d ic ia l. M o o r e a r g u e s th a t th e f in g e rp r in t e v id e n c e w a s h ig h ly p r e ju d ic ia l b e c a u s e it c oul d ha ve l e d the j ury t o c onne c thi m t o the r obbe ry i m pr ope r l y , e ve n though the go vernm entdi d n otprod uce e vi dence thatthe w eapo n u se d i n the robb ery r e s e m b le d th e a irp is to l in th e p a c k a g in g . M o o r e ig n o r e s th e f a c t th a t h is f in g e rp r in t o n a n ite m le f t in th e g e ta w a y c a ris p r o b a tiv e e v id e n c e th a t h e w a s in factth e p erso n d ri v i n g th e g et aw ay car. T h erefo re, w e fi n d n o erro r, m u ch l ess pl a i n e rr or , unde rR ul e s 401, 402, a nd 403. II I. B ec ause M oo re t i m el y r ai se d a B lake l y v . W as hi ngton , 5 4 2 U . S. 2 9 6 , 1 2 4 S. C t. 2 5 3 1 , 1 5 9 L . E d . 2 d 4 0 3 ( 2 0 0 4 ) o b je c tio n in th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, w e r e v ie w h is c la im d e n o v o . Se e U

ni t e d Stat e s v . P az , 40 5 F . 3d 94 6, 94 8 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ) ( per curi am ).9

B ef ore B oo ke r , a di stri ctcourtgeneral l y w as re qu i re d t o sent ence a d e f e n d a n t w ith in a c a lc u la te d g u id e lin e s r a n g e . T h e S u p r e m e C o u r t in B oo ke r , w hi ch w as i ss ued b ef

ore M oo re ’ s s ent enci ng , exci se d the prov i si on of the fe dera l se nt enci ng st atut e thatm ade the gu i del i nes m andat ory, re nd er i ng the gu i del i nes w h o lly a d v is o ry . See B oo ke r , 5 4 3 U. S . a t2 4 4 - 4 7 , 1 2 5 S . C t . a t7 5 6 - 5 7 . A B oo ke r error occurs w hen a di stri ctcourtj ud ge se nt ence s adefe nd ant“ un der am andat ory G ui del i nes s chem e, even i n the abse nce of a Si xth A m endm entvi ol at i on . ” U ni t ed Stat e s v . She l ton , 400 F . 3d 1330, 1330- 31. H er e, the di stri ctcourtprop er l y app l i ed the ob struct i on of j ust i ce enhancem entbecause M oo re w as se nt ence d aft er B o o ker and tre at ed the gu i del i nes a s a d v is o ry . U

ni t e d Stat e s v . C hau , 42 6 F . 3d 13 18 , 13 23 -24 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ) ( per c ur i a m ) . T he c our te xpl i c i t l y a c know l e dge d a tl e a s ttw i c e dur i ng the s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng tha tthe gui de l i ne s w e r e a dvi s ory . T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d notappl y the gui de l i ne s i n a m a nda t ory f a s hi on; w e thus f

i nd no B o o ker e rr o r . I

d. I V. E v e n p o s t- B oo ke r , d is tr ic t c o u r ts a r e r e q u ir e d to c o n s u lt a n d ta k e in to c o n s id e r a tio n th e g u id e lin e s , w h ic h in c lu d e s c a lc u la tin g th e g u id e lin e s a c c u r a te ly . U n i t ed S ta t es v. C ra w

f o rd , 4 0 7 F .3 d 1 1 7 4 , 1 1 7 8 - 7 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . M is in te rp r e tin g th e g u id e lin e s e f f e c tiv e ly e q u a te s to f

a ilin g to c o n s u lt th e m . I d. at10

1 1 7 9 . W e r e v ie w a d is tr ic t c o u r t’s g u id e lin e c a lc u la tio n s d e n o v o . U ni t ed Stat es v. D eV egt er , 4 3 9 F .3 d 1 2 9 9 , 1 3 0 3 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . He r e , th e d i s tr i c tc o u r tp u rp o r t e d t o “ n o tc o n s i d e r ” Mo o r e ’ s 1 9 9 5 DU I c onvi c t i on i n c a l c ul a t i ng hi s c r i m i na l hi s t ory s c or e . T he c our ts t a t e d: “ T he de f e nda ntha s tw o D U I ’ s . I w i l l a s s um e tha tthe r e w a s a pr obl e m w i th the s e c ond o n e . . . and w ould not

c ons i de rthat . ” I f

the 1995 D U I w a s noti nc l ude d, the n the c r i m i na l hi s t ory c a t e gory w oul d ha ve be e n C a t e gory I I I , w hi c h w oul d ha ve re sul t ed i n a gu i del i nes s ent enci ng ra ng e of 87 t o 1 08 m on ths. T he ca l cul at ed g u id e lin e s r a n g e a s s ta te d b y th e d is tr ic t c o u r t w a s 1 0 0 to 1 2 5 m o n th s , w h ic h is c o n s is te n t w ith a C a te g o ry I V c r im in a l h is to ry . T he part i es i nt erpretthe di stri ctcourt ’ s a ct i on s di ff er ent l y. M oo re ar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourtsust ai ned h i s obj ec t i on bu tdi d n otadj ustthe gu i del i ne ra ng e, the n s e nt e nc e d hi m unde ra n i m pr ope r l y c a l c ul a t e d gui de l i ne r a nge . T he g o v er n m en t, o n th e o th erh an d , arg u es th at th e d istrict co u rt su stain ed M o o re ’s obj ec t i on , re ca l cul at ed the gu i del i ne ra ng e, and then exerci se d i t s di sc re t i on t o v ary u p w a r d f r o m th e g u id e lin e r a n g e . T h e r ec o rd b etter s u p p o rts M o o re ’s in terp re tati o n o f th e d istrict co u rt’s a c t i ons . T he di s tr i c tc our ts t a t e d tha ti t“ w oul d notc ons i de r ” the D U I c onvi c t i on, w hi ch w ou l d h ave y i el ded a C at egory I II cr i m i nal hi st ory, ye tthe courtst at ed that11

the gui de l i ne r a nge w a s 100 t o 125 m onths , w hi c h w oul d be the pr ope rgui de l i ne r a nge f ora C a t e gory I V c r i m i na l hi s t ory . T hi s l e a ds t o ourc onc l us i on tha tthe d istrict co u rt fa il ed to ca lcu late th e g u id elin es p ro p er ly . G iv en th e d istrict co u rt’s s ta te m e n ts th a t it in te n d e d to s e n te n c e w ith in th e g u id e lin e s r a n g e , it is u n c e r ta in w hether the court , abse ntthe ca l cul at i on error, w ou l d h ave l i kel y s ent ence d M oo re i n the sa m e f

as hi on . In l i gh tof thi s uncert ai nty a nd the un ce rt ai nty a s t o w hether the di s tr i c tc our ts us t a i ne d M oor e ’ s obj e c t i on, w e va c a t e M oor e ’ s s e nt e nc e a nd re m an d to th e d istrict co u rt w ith in stru ctio n s to clar ify its ru li n g o n M o o re ’s obj ec t i on , ho w i tca l cul at ed the gu i del i ne ra ng e i n l i gh tof thatrul i ng , and w hether i ti nt e nde d f

orM oor e ’ s s e nt e nc e t o f a l l w i thi n the appl i c abl e r a nge or , a s the g o v ern m en tco n t en d s, t o co n st i tu t e a v ari an ce fro m th e ad v i so ry g u i d el i n es. A FFI R M ED I N PA R T, VA C A TED A N D R EM A N D ED I N PA R T.