Opinion ID: 4582865
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Absence of Injury

Text: Mr. Lawless further argues that the district court “erred by failing to take into account . . . that [his] offense did not result in substantial property damage or personal injury.” Aplt. Br. at 39. This is not correct. At the hearing, the court manifested its understanding that Mr. Lawless’s bombs did not cause an injury. For example, it corrected the government’s statement that Mr. Lawless’s bombs had three victims. Addressing the government, it said “I think Mr. Holloway you misspoke right now. You said three separate victims. If there are victims of these IEDs, that’s news to me.” Rec., vol. V at 41-42. As this example illustrates, the court was mindful that Mr. Lawless’s bombs did not cause injuries and therefore it did not procedurally err by considering a clearly erroneous fact.