Opinion ID: 3153279
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: MacArthur's Double Counting Claim

Text: MacArthur also contests the district court's application of the two-point enhancement for causing reckless endangerment during flight under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2. He argues that the conduct forming the basis for this enhancement--his leading the troopers on a high speed chase--had already been taken into account when the district court applied the four-point enhancement under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possessing the firearms in connection with another felony offense. This, according to MacArthur, - 11 - impermissibly resulted in double counting. Because he did not object at sentencing, we review for plain error. While it is true that the district court cited MacArthur's high speed chase in applying the four-point enhancement under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), the district court did so in a belt-and-suspenders manner, as it also cited MacArthur's burglary of the home from which the firearms were stolen. Since the burglary alone is plainly an uncharged felony, and MacArthur in a sentencing memorandum admitted to that burglary, any reliance by the district court on the car chase was unnecessary. On plain error review, we cannot, therefore, say that any such reliance could have prejudiced MacArthur even were we to assume, arguendo, that the type of double counting of which MacArthur complains would otherwise be improper.