United States v. Jeffrey Scott Truitt
696 F. App'x 391
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Truitt pleaded guilty to six federal offenses including possession of an unregistered destructive device, unregistered and stolen firearms, methamphetamine possession, and theft of firearms from a licensee.
- ATF investigations linked multiple firearms recovered from associates to Truitt and uncovered methamphetamine and weapons at his residence; an inmate witness reported Truitt traded firearms for meth.
- The probation officer grouped the firearms counts and set a base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 of 20.
- Two four-level enhancements were applied: § 2K2.1(b)(5) (firearm trafficking) and § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) (possession of firearms in connection with another felony — here, drug possession).
- Truitt objected, arguing the two enhancements double counted the same conduct; the district court overruled and sentenced him to 106 months' imprisonment.
- Truitt appealed arguing impermissible double counting; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether applying both § 2K2.1(b)(5) and § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) constitutes impermissible double counting | Truitt: Both enhancements punish the same trafficking conduct, so applying both double counts | Government: The enhancements address separate harms—trafficking and facilitation of a separate felony (drug offense)—and may cumulative apply | Court affirmed: No impermissible double counting; both enhancements may apply because they punish conceptually distinct harms and notes contemplate cumulative application |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Matos-Rodriguez, 188 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir.) (standard: de novo review of double-counting claims)
- United States v. Dudley, 463 F.3d 1221 (11th Cir. 2006) (presumption that distinct guideline sections apply cumulatively; double counting only when one provision fully accounts for the harm of another)
- United States v. Asante, 782 F.3d 639 (11th Cir.) (permitting separate enhancements when neither fully accounts for both harms)
- United States v. Rhind, 289 F.3d 690 (11th Cir.) (expansive interpretation of "in connection with" another felony)
- United States v. Carillo-Ayala, 713 F.3d 82 (11th Cir.) (sale of a firearm in exchange for drugs can be "in connection with" a drug offense)