Opinion ID: 608725
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: LeMaux's Sentence

Text: 39 The district court considered the evidence of LeMaux's violent collection of drug debts in sentencing him though he was acquitted of Count III. The district court found that the conspiracy ended prior to November 1987 and so entered the defendants' sentences pursuant to pre-guideline law. We held in United States v. Brady, 928 F.2d 844, 851 (9th Cir.1991), that a court cannot consider conduct for which a defendant was acquitted in imposing sentence. The holding, however, is limited to sentences imposed under the guidelines. Pre-guidelines law gives the district court the authority to consider conduct which did not result in a conviction when sentence is imposed for acts occurring prior to the effective date of the sentencing guidelines. See Walker v. Endell, 850 F.2d 470, 476-77 (9th Cir.1987), certs. denied, 488 U.S. 926, 488 U.S. 981 (1988); United States v. Lowe, 654 F.2d 562, 565-66 (9th Cir.1981); United States v. Morgan, 595 F.2d 1134, 1135-37 (9th Cir.1979). We are bound by that authority in this case and must affirm the sentence. 40 The judgments and sentences are AFFIRMED.