Opinion ID: 202124
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Issues Raised in Anders Brief

Text: The Anders brief addressed appellant's argument that the district court erred in applying a 16-level enhancement in its -2- guidelines calculation where the sentence served was allegedly less than thirteen months. We agree with the conclusion in the Anders brief that this issue is without merit. The argument is foreclosed by this court's decision in United States v. Carrasco-Mateo, 389 F.3d 239 (1st Cir. 2004), cert. denied, __ U.S. __, 125 S. Ct. 1721 (2005). The Anders brief also correctly states that there is no Booker error where the court, treating the guidelines as advisory, bases enhancements upon factual findings not charged in the indictment and proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or admitted by the defendant. See United States v. Antonakopoulos, 399 F.3d 68, 75 (1st Cir. 2005).