United States v. Shaun McNabb, 713 F. App'x 533

Shaun McNabb was convicted of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance (21 U.S.C. § 841) and possession of a firearm by a prohibited person (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)); sentenced to 60 months.
McNabb moved to suppress evidence, disputing officers’ account that he committed traffic violations and that the car was not searched before a drug dog arrived.
At the suppression hearing the district court credited officers’ testimony over McNabb’s; the court denied the motion to suppress.
At sentencing the district court applied a four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possessing a firearm in connection with another felony because the gun was in the same backpack as the drugs.
McNabb argued the enhancement was improper, noting the jury acquitted him on a related count (possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking).
The Ninth Circuit affirmed: suppression denial upheld (credibility findings not clearly erroneous) and the sentencing enhancement sustained (preponderance standard, enhancement appropriate where gun proximate to drugs).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court erred in denying the motion to suppress	McNabb argued officers lied about traffic violations and pre-dog search, so evidence should be suppressed	Government argued officers’ testimony was credible and the search/detainment lawful	Denial affirmed; district court credibility findings not clearly erroneous
Whether a four-level § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement applies	McNabb argued enhancement improper, especially after acquittal on related firearm count	Government argued firearm found in same backpack as drugs supports enhancement	Enhancement affirmed; proximity to drugs supports enhancement under Guidelines commentary
Whether acquittal on related count precludes consideration at sentencing	McNabb argued acquittal shows lack of proof for enhancement	Government argued sentencing uses preponderance standard and judge may consider acquitted conduct	Court held acquittal is not dispositive; judge may consider conduct by preponderance (Watts)
Whether judge abused discretion applying Guidelines to facts	McNabb claimed enhancement wrongly applied given verdict and facts	Government relied on Guidelines commentary and factual record showing gun-drug proximity	No abuse of discretion; enhancement reasonably applied to facts

United States v. Crawford, 372 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir.) (standard: de novo review of suppression denials; factual findings for clear error)
United States v. Celestine, 324 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir.) (credibility determinations at suppression hearings are for the district court)
Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001) (clear error standard described as avoiding "definite and firm conviction" that a mistake was committed)
United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 (1948) (discussing standard for clear error review)
United States v. Johansson, 249 F.3d 848 (9th Cir.) (abuse of discretion standard for application of Sentencing Guidelines)
United States v. Watts, 519 U.S. 148 (1997) (judge may consider acquitted conduct at sentencing under preponderance standard)
United States v. Chadwell, 798 F.3d 910 (9th Cir.) (application of firearm enhancement where firearm emboldens drug sales)