Court Opinion

ID: 9377046
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-06 19:00:38.31482+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:11.589946
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50217         Document: 00516666199             Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/06/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-50217
                                     Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                     ____________                                 March 6, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Chelsie Shanae Stubblefield,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 7:21-CR-231-3
                      ______________________________

   Before Smith, Southwick, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Chelsie Shanae Stubblefield appeals the 360-month sentence imposed
   following her guilty plea to conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent
   to distribute methamphetamine.                We VACATE the sentence and
   REMAND because of the need for additional fact findings.

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50217       Document: 00516666199           Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/06/2023

                                      No. 22-50217

            When calculating the base offense level, the district court held
   Stubblefield responsible for all of the methamphetamine attributable to the
   conspiracy under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3. Stubblefield argues that the district court
   failed to make sufficient factual findings to support its relevant conduct
   findings. When the district court’s application of the sentencing guidelines
   is purely legal, our review is de novo. See United States v. Zapata-Lara, 615
   F.3d 388, 390 (5th Cir. 2010).
            In order to hold Stubblefield accountable for the 630 grams of
   methamphetamine involved in the conspiracy, the district court was required
   to make specific findings that the acts and omissions of the others involved
   constituted “relevant conduct,” i.e., that the other transactions were within
   the scope of a joint criminal activity, in furtherance of that activity, and
   reasonably foreseeable to Stubblefield. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B); § 1B1.3, cmt.
   n.3(D); see, e.g., United States v. Johnson, 14 F.4th 342, 347 (5th Cir. 2021),
   cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 928 (2022); United States v. Smith, 13 F.3d 860, 864–
   65 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Evbuomwan, 992 F.2d 70, 72 (5th Cir.
   1993).
            During sentencing, the district court determined that the 630 grams
   of methamphetamine attributed to the conspiracy was “reasonably
   foreseeable” to Stubblefield, but the court failed to make specific findings
   concerning the scope of the criminal activity she agreed to jointly undertake,
   or whether the entire amount of methamphetamine was within that scope or
   in furtherance of that activity.
            Additionally, the district court’s rationale for its relevant conduct
   determination is not implicit in its adoption of the presentence report, which
   did not make factual findings that would allow making Stubblefield
   accountable for jointly undertaken criminal activity. See Smith, 13 F.3d at
   867; Evbuomwan, 992 F.2d at 74. Because the district court’s reasoning is

                                           2
Case: 22-50217     Document: 00516666199          Page: 3   Date Filed: 03/06/2023

                                   No. 22-50217

   not apparent from the record, we cannot speculate as to the rationale for its
   relevant conduct determination. See Zapata-Lara, 615 F.3d at 391.
          We VACATE the sentence and REMAND to the district court for
   resentencing. If, on remand, the district court determines that Stubblefield
   is accountable for the conduct of others under Section 1B1.3(a)(1)(B), it
   should provide the required factual findings supporting its decision. See
   Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(B); § 1B1.3(a)(1)(A), (B) & cmt. n.3; Zapata-
   Lara, 615 F.3d at 391.

                                         3