Court Opinion

ID: 9490656
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 13:50:40.302665+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:54:14.343922
License: Public Domain

BEAM, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the court’s opinion as to the acceptance-of-responsibility issue, but I dissent from the court’s conclusion that the district court committed legal error by stating Cole’s testimony was irrelevant. I believe that the district court’s statement, taken in the context of the court’s discourse at sentencing, simply evinced its belief that the government witnesses’ testimony as to what Cole could produce was more credible than Cole’s testimony on that point. In my view, the court then relied on the credited testimony in approximating drug quantity, as directed by the applicable commentary. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1, comment. (n.12) (1995); see United States v. Adipietro, 983 F.2d 1468, 1472 (8th Cir.1993) (determinations concerning witness credibility are virtually unreviewable on appeal).