Instead, this information is more like an investigative report, to which this non-disclosure statute has been held inapplicable. While the statute protects some information from disclosure, Guerrero's status as a parolee or probationer is not the type of sensitive information that this statute was intended to protect. In addition, the district court's application of the Sentencing Guidelines was not in error. We review the district court's factual determinations at sentencing for clear error, and its legal conclusions de novo. The Sentencing Guidelines provide that three points should be added to the criminal history score for each prior sentence of imprisonment exceeding one year and one month.
Prior sentences imposed in unrelated cases are to be counted separately.
U.S.S.G. 4A1.2, application n.3. Guerrero contends that two of his three prior convictions were consolidated for the guilty plea hearing, and that all three were consolidated for sentencing. Thus Guerrero argues that the convictions were related and should have been counted only once when calculating his criminal history score. The record indicates that the three convictions were informally consolidated for convenience and judicial economy. Guerrero points to no evidence, and we find none in the record, that the cases were factually related.