FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT JUNE 27, 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- 10804 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 4 - 0 0 0 2 8 - C R - F T M- 2 9 DN F 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 T E R R E N C E D U B O S 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 orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( Ju n e 27, 2006) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d D U B IN A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: A pp el l antT erre nce D uB ose app ea l s the 24 0-m on th sent ence i m po se d2

fol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty pl eat o con spi ra cy w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e 50 g ra m s or m ore of c oc a i ne ba s e , 21 U . S . C . §§ 841( a ) ( 1) , 841( b) ( 1) ( A ) ( i i i ) , 846. O n ap p e a l, D u b o s e a r g u e s th a t A lm enda rez -T orres v . U ni t ed S tat es , 5 2 3 U . S. 22 4, 1 18 S . C t . 12 19 , 14 0 L . E d. 2d 35 0 (19 98 ), w as i ncorrec t l y dec i ded and that hi s pri or conv i ct i on s, w hi ch the di stri ctcourtused t o app l y aca re erof fe nd er e nha nc e m e nt , s houl d ha ve be e n a l l e ge d i n the i ndi c tm e nta nd pr ove n be y ond a re as on abl e dou btt o a j ury . D ubos e ’ s pos i t i on i s pr e c l ude d by ourm a ny de c i s i ons a tt e s t i ng t o the cont i nu ed val i di ty of A lm enda rez -T orres . See U

ni t ed S tat es v . G ree r , 440 F . 3d 1267, 1273 ( 1 1th C i r . 2006) ( “ A s w e ha ve s a i d s e ve r a l t i m e s , unl e s s a nd unt i l the S u p rem e C o u rtsp eci fi cal l y o v erru l es A lm enda rez -T orres , w e w ill c o n tin u e to f ol l ow i t . ” ) . A c c or di ngl y, w e c onc l ude tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tdi d note r ri n us i ng D u b o se’ s p ri o r co n v i ct i o n s, w h i ch w ere n o tch ar g ed i n h i s i n d i ctm en t , t o ap p l y a c a r e e ro f f e n d e re n h a n c e m e n t to h is o f f e n s e le v e l. D u b o s e f u r th e ra r g u e s o n ap p e a l th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e r r e d b y f a ilin g to att ac h anythi ng t o t he P S I a s r equi re d b y F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 32 (i )( 3)(C ). We r e v i e w de no vo l egal qu es t i on s c on ce rni ng the F eder al R ul es of C ri m i nal P r o c e d u r e . U

ni t ed S tat es v . N oel , 23 1 F . 3d 83 3, 83 6 (1 1t h C i r . 20 00 ).3

F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 32 (i )( 3) prov i des thata s ent enci ng court

“ m ust- f or any di sput ed po rt i on of the pres ent ence re po rtor ot her c on trovert ed m att er - ru l e o n th e d i sp u t e o r d et erm i n e th ata ru l i n g i s u n n ecessary . . . an d m u st appe nd a c opy of

the c our t ' s de t e r m i na t i ons unde rthi s rul e t o a ny c opy of the p r e s e n te n c e r e p o r t m a d e a v a ilab le to th e B u r e a u o f P r is o n s .” F e d . R . C r im . P . 32 (i )( 3)(B ), (C ). T he re cord here demo nstra t es thatthe di stri ctcourtdi d n otatt ac h a w ri tt en s t a t e m e ntof

i t s de t e r m i na t i ons t o the pr e s e nt e nc e r e por t . “ T he f a i l ur e of the d i s tr i c tc o u r tt o ap p e n d a w r i tt e n r e c o r d o f i t s f i n d i n g s i s a m i n i s t e r i a l m a tt e r, ho w ever, w hi ch ca n b e r em edi ed on re m and w i tho utre se nt enci ng . ” U ni t ed S tat es v . Kram er , 94 3 F . 2d 15 43 , 15 53 (1 1t h C i r . 19 90 ). F orthe a bove - s t a t e d r e a s ons , w e a f f i r m D ubos e ’ s s e nt e nc e , butr e m a nd the c a s e t o the di s tr i c tc our tf orthe l i m i t e d purpos e of a tt a c hi ng a c opy of

the s e n te n c in g h e a r in g tr a n s c r ip t to th e p r e s e n te n c e r e p o r t. AF F I RME D A ND RE MAND E D.