United States v. Jesus Pineda, 770 F.3d 313

Pineda was convicted of distributing cocaine on January 25, 2012 and February 8, 2012, possessing a firearm in furtherance of the January 25 drug transaction, and possessing a sawed-off shotgun.
A sawed-off shotgun was involved in the January 25 transaction, and a .380 caliber handgun was also discussed for sale but not sold then.
A confidential informant purchased cocaine and a stolen assault rifle from Raul Sanchez, which Sanchez had obtained from Pineda, on November 30, 2011.
The probation office included the November 30, 2011 transaction as relevant conduct, relying on Sanchez’s statement to law enforcement.
Under the guidelines, the district court increased Pineda’s offense level based on three firearms and a stolen firearm, plus a firearms-trafficking enhancement, leading to a total sentence of 132 months.
Pineda objected to the relevance of the November 30 transaction and to various guideline enhancements, but the district court overruled those objections and sentenced him.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) enhancement	Pineda argues evidence shows possession but not possession in furtherance.	State argues the firearm helped forward the cocaine transaction.	Substantial evidence supports possession in furtherance.
admissibility and relevance of November 30, 2011 transaction as relevant conduct	Sanchez’s hearsay statement lacked reliability; no direct corroboration.	Trial testimony corroborates Sanchez’s statement; reliable enough for sentencing.	District court properly considered November 30 as relevant conduct.
Double counting with § 2K2.1(b)(1) and § 924(c)	Enhancing for number of firearms under § 2K2.1(b)(1) double counts the weapon for § 924(c).	§ 2K2.1(b)(1) and § 924(c) punish different conduct; no impermissible double counting.	Not impermissible double counting; enhancements apply to different facets of conduct.
Applicability of § 2K2.1(b)(5) firearm-trafficking enhancement	Enhancement requires two or more firearms transferred in one act.	Two or more firearms were transferred; timing does not negate trafficking.	§ 2K2.1(b)(5) appropriately applied.

United States v. Lomax, 293 F.3d 701 (4th Cir. 2002) (sufficiency review for § 924(c) elements; “in furtherance” standard)
United States v. Myers, 280 F.3d 407 (4th Cir. 2002) (sufficiency standard and interpretation of § 924(c))
United States v. Jenkins, 566 F.3d 160 (4th Cir. 2009) (accessibility/availability of firearm for protection in drug deals)
United States v. Tresvant, 677 F.2d 1018 (4th Cir. 1982) (probative value of circumstantial evidence in aiding reasonable inferences)
United States v. Gilliam, 987 F.2d 1009 (4th Cir. 1993) (sentencing reliability review for information presented at sentencing)
United States v. McVey, 752 F.3d 606 (4th Cir. 2014) (clear error standard in determining relevant conduct)
United States v. Hodge, 354 F.3d 305 (4th Cir. 2004) (factors for determining same course of conduct in relevant conduct)
United States v. Reevey, 364 F.3d 151 (4th Cir. 2004) (double-counting principles in guideline application)
United States v. Terrell, 608 F.3d 679 (10th Cir. 2010) (separate treatment of firearms considerations under § 2K2.1 vs § 924(c))