Court Opinion

ID: 9965112
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-05-01 18:00:35.058321+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:24:42.856700
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-20395            Document: 51-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 05/01/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit

                                   ____________                                     FILED
                                                                                   May 1, 2024
                                    No. 23-20395                               Lyle W. Cayce
                                  Summary Calendar                                  Clerk
                                  ____________

United States of America,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Robert Rakestraw,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Southern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 4:22-CR-170-2
                   ______________________________

Before Barksdale, Engelhardt, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Robert Rakestraw contests the 30-months’ sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for making false statements in connection
with the acquisition of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(6), 2
(punishing as principals individuals who aid or abet). He challenges the
district court’s applying a six-level-sentencing enhancement under Guideline

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-20395         Document: 51-1       Page: 2    Date Filed: 05/01/2024

                                  No. 23-20395

§ 2K2.1(b)(1)(C) (outlining increase when between 25 and 99 firearms are
involved). Rakestraw maintains: he is accountable for only the 23 firearms
purchased by his codefendant; and the 54 firearms he purchased personally
should not have been included as relevant conduct.
       Although post-Booker, the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only,
the district court must avoid significant procedural error, such as improperly
calculating the Guidelines sentencing range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
38, 46, 51 (2007). If no such procedural error exists, a properly preserved
objection to an ultimate sentence is reviewed for substantive reasonableness
under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Id. at 51; United States v. Delgado-
Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 751–53 (5th Cir. 2009). In that respect, for issues
preserved in district court, its application of the Guidelines is reviewed de
novo; its factual findings, only for clear error. E.g., United States v. Cisneros-
Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008).
       Specific offense characteristics, including the number of firearms
involved, are determined by the “Relevant Conduct” principles in Guideline
§ 1B1.3. E.g., United States v. Longstreet, 603 F.3d 273, 278–79 (5th Cir. 2010)
(discussing number of firearms determination). “Relevant conduct includes
offenses that are part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or
plan as the offense of conviction.” United States v. Brummett, 355 F.3d 343,
344 (5th Cir. 2003).
       The court did not clearly err in finding Rakestraw’s individual
purchases of 54 firearms was relevant conduct for the Guideline
§ 2K2.1(b)(1)(C) enhancement. See, e.g., United States v. Barfield, 941 F.3d
757, 761–63 (5th Cir. 2019) (discussing relevant-conduct standard). The
unrebutted facts in the presentence investigation report (PSR) showed
Rakestraw’s purchases, and his codefendant’s straw purchases, were part of
a common course of conduct and series of ongoing offenses because they

                                        2
Case: 23-20395        Document: 51-1       Page: 3     Date Filed: 05/01/2024

                                  No. 23-20395

were connected in similarity, regularity, and time. See Guideline § 1B1.3,
cmt. n.5(B)(ii) (outlining meaning of “Same course of conduct”).
       Rakestraw asserts the recovery of the firearms he purchased is too
speculative to show that his purchases were unlawful or that he falsely
certified the ATF forms.        He contends there is no direct evidence
establishing he engaged in any sale or transfer of the firearms he personally
purchased.
       Nevertheless, the Government was not required to present any direct
evidence of a sale or transfer. E.g., United States v. Robinson, 654 F.3d 558,
562–63 (5th Cir. 2011) (“Further, direct evidence [that] conclusively
establishes intent is not necessary to support the enhancement because the
sentencing court is permitted to make common-sense inferences from the
circumstantial evidence.” (alteration in original) (citation omitted)). The
district court inferred such sale or transfer from the abundant evidence in the
PSR, including: the number of firearms purchased; the codefendant’s stating
Rakestraw often sold or gave away firearms; firearms purchased by
Rakestraw were found in the possession of others at the scene of numerous
accidents and crimes; and Rakestraw’s online messages offering firearms for
sale or to purchase firearms for others. See id.; Barfield, 941 F.3d at 762–63.
       Rakestraw briefly asserts, for the first time on appeal, that the district
court’s applying the enhancement undermines District of Columbia v. Heller,
554 U.S. 570 (2008); McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010); and
New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). In addition
to the limited review, if any, accorded such belated contentions, this
contention is merely reasserting his earlier contention that there is no proof
that he lied on the ATF forms when purchasing 54 firearms or that he
transferred any of those firearms to others.
       AFFIRMED.

                                       3