Court Opinion

ID: 9478715
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 06:55:56.260062+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:46:34.733914
License: Public Domain

FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the portions of the majority opinion that affirm the judgment of the district court. However, I respectfully dis*1137sent from the majority’s decision to remand this case “for further proceedings” due to the district court’s failure to follow the procedure required by Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(3)(D). I would remand for a more limited purpose.
I believe that further proceedings are unnecessary. Garbett’s substantial rights were not violated by the district court’s failure to make factual findings or state that such findings were unnecessary. I am convinced that the particular facts that Garbett claims were inaccurately stated in the presentence investigation report did not affect his sentence and were not probative of any issue affecting the sentencing. The district court’s failure to follow Rule 32(c)(3)(D) is a harmless error in this case and remanding for further proceedings requires the district court to perform a futile function.
I would remand this case only for the limited purpose of requiring the district court to comply with the requirement of Rule 32(c)(3)(D) that a transcript of the sentencing proceedings be attached to any copy of the presentence investigation report made available to prison authorities.