Opinion ID: 710261
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Edith Wacker's Role in the Offense

Text: 116 In justifying the three-level enhancement to Edith Wacker's sentence, the district court's sole reference to her involvement in the criminal activity was the following brief statement: [T]he court has considered the defendant's role in the offense as well as her minimal prior record. (R.O.A. Vol. XLIII, at 5). The court made no findings of Edith Wacker's role as a manager or supervisor, nor did it refer to any factors or evidence by which we could review any such findings had they been made. The court similarly failed to find that the activity specifically involving Edith Wacker had five or more participants or was otherwise extensive. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 3B1.1(b). Our recent cases emphasize that an enhancement based on the defendant's role in the offense will stand only if the record contains  'a clear picture of the reasoning employed by the sentencing court.'  United States v. Pelliere, 57 F.3d 936, 940 (10th Cir.1995) (quoting Torres, 53 F.3d at 1143); see also Roberts, 14 F.3d at 523 (Generalized or random observations that help to shade in defendant's role ... cannot alone substitute for the inquiry under section 3B1.1). Simply consider[ing] the defendant's role in the offense without advancing a factual basis to support the enhancement does not satisfy the requirements of section 3B1.1. 117 The government urges us to affirm Edith Wacker's sentence because the court's factual conclusion was well-grounded in the record of the case. Appellee's Br. at 11. We are not persuaded. Our cases require the district court to make findings, not conclusions. Moreover, even if the record evidence overwhelmingly supports the enhancement, appellate fact-finding cannot substitute for the district court's duty to articulate clearly the reasons for the enhancement. See Roberts, 14 F.3d at 523 ([I]t is not this court's role to make the factual findings necessary to support a sentencing calculation; that is the role of the district court.) (citation omitted). Accordingly, we remand Edith Wacker's sentence to the district court for more specific factual findings on her role as a manager or supervisor under section 3B1.1(b).