Opinion ID: 2995155
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Crack Guidelines

Text: Booker argues that the judge erred when he calculated Booker’s sentence using the crack category of the Sentencing Guidelines because the government failed to prove by the preponderance of the evidence that Booker’s drugs were crack cocaine. Because we held that a reasonable jury would be compelled to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Booker’s drugs were crack cocaine, we decline to address Booker’s argument further. See Earnest, 185 F.3d at 813 (holding that a district court properly relied on the testimony of witness after witness that the drugs at issue were crack, despite the government expert’s less precise conclusion that the drugs were cocaine base.). The judge did not err when he calculated Booker’s base level offense according to the crack category of the Sentencing Guidelines. AFFIRMED.