Opinion ID: 586507
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Cross Reference

Text: 26 (1)If the defendant used the firearm in committing or attempting another offense, apply the guideline in respect to such other offense, or § 2X1.1 (Attempt or Conspiracy) if the resulting offense level is higher than that determined above. 27 U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 (1988). 28 There is no indication in § 2K2.1 or in the Commentary or Application Note thereto that would indicate the Commission considered the number of firearms illegally purchased when it established the base offense level of 9. Appellant argues that, by the Commission's deliberate omission of this factor from § 2K2.1, but its inclusion in § 2K2.3, it is manifest that the Commission considered the number of purchased firearms when it wrote § 2K2.1 and decided that this factor was not relevant. Therefore, appellant maintains that no upward departure is appropriate. 29 Our review of departures is set forth in United States v. Hummer, 916 F.2d 186, 192 (4th Cir. 1990), as follows: 30 We review departures from the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range under a multi-part test of reasonableness derived from our reading of 18 U.S.C.A. § 3742 (West 1985 & Supp. 1990) in conjunction with 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(b) (West Supp. 1990). United States v. Summers, 893 F.2d 63 (4th Cir. 1990). Under this test, we first examine de novo the specific reasons cited by the district court in support of its sentence outside the Guidelines range to ascertain whether those reasons encompass factors not adequately taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating the guidelines. 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(b) (West Supp. 1990). If the sentencing court identified one or more factors potentially warranting departure, we apply a clearly erroneous standard and review the factual support in the record for those identified circumstances. Upon ascertaining that there is an adequate factual basis for the factors, we apply an abuse of discretion standard to determine if, on balance, the cited departure factors are of sufficient importance in the case such that a sentence outside the Guidelines range should result. Id. Similarly, we apply an abuse of discretion standard to determine if the extent of departure was reasonable. 31 Section 2K2.1 has been amended in 1989, 1990, and 1991 (U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1, Historical Note (Nov. 1991)), and these amendments have generally increased the severity of punishment for firearms violations. It was not until the amendments effective November 1991 that the section included any reference to the number of firearms in the offense. It now provides: 32 (b) Specific Offense Characteristics 33
Number of FirearmsIncrease in Level 34 (A)3-4add 1 (B)5-7 add 2(C)8-12add 3(D)13-24add 4(E)25-49add 5(F)50 or more add 6. 35 U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 (Nov. 1991). 36 It appears obvious that the Sentencing Commission did not consider the number of firearms when it establisheds 2K2.1 (effective 1988). Over time and with the experience it acquired in the interim, the Commission amended this section, effective November 1991, to provide an increase in offense level as indicated above. 37 We find no merit to the appellant's claim that the Commission did, by a process he refers to as deliberate omission, encompass a number of firearms. To follow this reasoning would lead to a conclusion that everything not included in the guidelines has been carefully considered by the Commission and deliberately omitted. The result would be no departures, and this cannot be reconciled with the clearly expressed intent of Congress to allow departures. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(b). 38 Likewise, there is no merit to the claim that, because the number of firearms is reflected in § 2K2.2(b)(1), the element must have been considered and excluded from § 2K2.1. The guidelines cautioned against such assumptions. The Policy Statement tos 5K2.0 (Nov. 1991) provides: 39 Also, a factor may be listed as a specific offense characteristic under one guideline but not under all guidelines. Simply because it was not listed does not mean that there may not be circumstances when that factor would be relevant to sentencing. For example, the use of a weapon has been listed as a specific offense characteristic under many guidelines, but not under immigration violations. Therefore, if a weapon is a relevant factor to sentencing for an immigration violation, the court may depart for this reason. 40 U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0 Policy Statement (Nov. 1991). 41 The issue in the present case is not whether the Commission considered the number of firearms when it adopted § 2K2.2, but whether this element was considered when it adopted § 2K2.1. We find no evidence that the number of firearms was considered when § 2K2.1 was adopted. The base offense level, specific offense characteristics, and other adjustments to this section make no mention of the number of firearms, and the number of firearms purchased by a nonresident using false identification is a relevant factor that is important to the sentencing court. 42 Subsequent amendments to this section also indicate that the element was not originally considered.