United States v. Jorge Luis Alicea, 875 F.3d 606

Defendant Jorge Luis Alicea pleaded guilty to three counts of distribution of controlled substances, one count of possession with intent to distribute, and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
District court set base offense level at 20 under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A) because Alicea allegedly committed the § 922(g) offense after a prior controlled-substance conviction.
The presentence report listed a 2006 New York conviction for criminal sale of a controlled substance on school grounds; Alicea objected, arguing the government had not proven the conviction.
The probation officer produced a New York certificate of disposition identifying “Alicea, Jorge” and describing the conviction; Alicea pointed to minor discrepancies (birthdate, clerk signature not printed) but did not deny he was the defendant in that case.
The court also relied on two additional New York misdemeanor convictions (possession of a controlled substance and possession of marijuana) tied to Alicea via identical ID numbers and listed aliases in his NCIC report; Alicea challenged their reliability.
The district court adopted the PSR findings; on appeal the Eleventh Circuit reviewed factual findings for clear error and affirmed both the base offense level and the criminal history calculation (any error on the two misdemeanors was harmless).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the government proved a prior controlled-substance conviction sufficient to raise base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A)	Alicea: certificate of disposition is unreliable (dubious wording, unsigned clerk name, wrong birthdate); thus conviction not proven	Government: certificate of disposition is presumptive evidence under NY law and sufficient by a preponderance; Alicea later conceded he was the defendant in that case	Affirmed — certificate was adequate; district court did not clearly err in applying base level 20
Whether district court erred in counting three prior NY convictions in criminal history score	Alicea: government failed to provide reliable proof of the three NY convictions	Government: PSR and NCIC identifiers and aliases reliably linked convictions to Alicea; three Florida convictions also counted	Affirmed — court did not clearly err; even if two NY misdemeanors were excluded, error would be harmless because § 4A1.1(c) capped points and remaining convictions still produced same score

United States v. Robertson, 493 F.3d 1322 (11th Cir. 2007) (standard for clear-error review of district court factual findings)
United States v. Rodriguez, 398 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2005) (government must prove prior convictions by a preponderance of the evidence)
United States v. Green, 480 F.3d 627 (2d Cir. 2007) (New York certificate of disposition constitutes presumptive evidence of the facts it states)
United States v. Neri-Hernandes, 504 F.3d 587 (5th Cir. 2007) (certificate of disposition has sufficient indicia of reliability to establish a prior conviction)
United States v. Monzo, 852 F.3d 1343 (11th Cir. 2017) (harmless-error framework for sentencing-calculation errors)