United States v. Sheron Phipps, 524 F. App'x 209

Phipps pled guilty to possessing cocaine with intent to distribute (March 10, 2010).
PSR recommended attributing seven kilograms of cocaine for sentencing.
District court attributed three kilograms based on three kilogram-sized wrappers found in trash.
Evidence at sentencing included home search with cocaine, firearms, cash, and Durbin’s interview with a cousin.
Cousin testimony and other items were discussed but the court limited consideration to the wrappers.
Final sentence: 100 months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether three kilograms attributed was clearly erroneous	Phipps argues quantity is uncertain; error in attribution.	Court permitted estimation under preponderance of the evidence.	Not clearly erroneous; three kilograms upheld.
Adequacy of evidence for each wrapper’s weight	Edwards couldn’t quantify cocaine per wrapper; unreliable.	Approximation allowed; two positive tests plus context suffice.	Evidence supported each wrapper likely contained one kilogram.
Double/triple-wrapping theory	Wrappers could have been used to double/triple wrap a single brick.	No masking agents found; circumstances support separate bricks.	No clear error; district court could infer separate bricks.
Reliability and due-process of sentencing evidence	Untested third wrapper undermines reliability.	Guidelines allow reliable information with indicia of reliability.	Due process satisfied; no unreliable basis to overturn.

United States v. Bolds, 511 F.3d 568 (6th Cir. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for quantity findings)
United States v. Young, 553 F.3d 1035 (6th Cir. 2009) (preponderance standard for quantity determinations)
United States v. Latouf, 132 F.3d 320 (6th Cir. 1997) (clearly erroneous review of factual findings)
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 (1985) (clear-error standard in appellate review)
United States v. Walton, 908 F.2d 1289 (6th Cir. 1990) (requiring only preponderance for quantity estimates)
United States v. Hernandez, 227 F.3d 686 (6th Cir. 2000) (approximations permissible in drug-quantity determinations)
United States v. German, 486 F.3d 849 (5th Cir. 2007) (evidence-based quantity inferences in sentencing)
United States v. Dorsey, 51 F. App’x 374 (4th Cir. 2002) (admissible probabilistic inferences at sentencing)
United States v. Agiz-Meza, 99 F.3d 1052 (11th Cir. 1996) (preponderance standard for quantity attribution)
United States v. Crockett, 82 F.3d 722 (7th Cir. 1996) (reasonableness of quantity estimates at sentencing)
United States v. Eberspacher, 936 F.2d 387 (8th Cir. 1991) (support for probabilistic quantity findings)