*1 plea he entered his standing was when America, UNITED STATES guilty. Plaintiff-Appellee, Tr. at 44.
Sentencing J.A. alleges that the Government
Defendant decided not to move for the reduction ADKINS, L. Karson Defendant- discovered, contrary to its initial when it expectation, that the defendant would not pur- criminal qualify as an armed career 923(e). Appellant’s
suant 18 U.S.C. of Appeals, United States Court 11-12. if this motivation Br. at Even Sixth Circuit. a claim that Govern- support could Submitted: June on with reneged purported
ment deal Decided and Filed: Nov. Defendant, speculation it on pure is part of the Defendant. Defendant has proof that the United States produced through thought pro-
in fact such a went Indeed, the facts are inconsistent
cess. If, theory: as Defendant
with Defendant’s
contends, only realized the Government qualify not after it re-
Defendant would PSR, surely it indi-
viewed the would have objection report.
cated some sort of
This it did not do. insufficient produced
The Defendant has claim of a
evidence to base its breach plea agreement. above, it would
For the reasons stated
not district court to improper be rather than a
award two-level decrease 3E1.1(b).
three-level decrease under
III. Conclusion above, forth
For the reasons set sentence and REMAND
VACATE Smith’s case to the district court for resen-
Smith’s Booker and this
tencing consistent with
opinion. Judge, concurring. join majority opinion
I other than its # 5.
footnote Alford, Hollo- Jeffrey
ON BRIEF: P. Paducah, Alford, Kentucky, way, Long & *2 632 PSR, Wheatley, Terry cording provided Monica to the which was to
for prior sentencing, pos- United States At- Adkins to his Adkins Cushing, M. Assistant Louisville, Kentucky, Appel- grams methamphetamine. for sessed 9.59 of torneys, drug quantity, Based on this and after an lee. adjustment acceptance for Adkins’s of re- COOK, RYAN, Before: the a sponsibility, PSR recommended Judges. Circuit sentence of 92 to 115 months’ imprisonment. sentencing hearing, At the RYAN, J., opinion the of the delivered judge asked Adkins’s counsel if he and J., court, joined. in which Adkins had reviewed the PSR. Adkins’s responded they counsel that had. The MOORE, J., separate delivered a objec- if judge any then asked there were opinion concurring in the tions to the PSR. Adkins’s counsel re- RYAN, Judge. they objections that sponded had no defendant, PSR. appeal, In this direct Adkins, that alleges Karson L. his Sixth sentencing, Four months to prior right by jury trial was
Amendment to vio- government filed an information and notice based, prison lated because his sentence is § 21 stating to U.S.C. that by part, upon sentencing in facts found subject penalties Adkins was to enhanced judge by that were neither admitted Ad- previously because he had been convicted by jury. kins nor found a We do not felony drug prior of offense. Given the agree. The facts relevant to the district conviction, that, drug and the fact accord- court’s determination that Adkins would PSR, ing to the the current in- violation years’ imprisonment to ten be sentenced grams volved more than five of metham- in a meticulously presented were detailed phetamine, government argued that (PSR). Report Investigation Presentence subject mandatory Adkins was to a mini- object Adkins failed to to the PSR and is mum years’ imprisonment sentence of ten to have admitted the therefore deemed 841(b)(l)(B)(viii). § to 21 U.S.C. Therefore, therein. we will AF- facts object any Adkins did not to of the facts FIRM sentence. his supporting this sentence. The court sen- mandatory
tenced Adkins to the minimum I. years’ imprisonment. term of ten pleaded guilty conspiracy to to Adkins II. methamphetamine, in viola- manufacture 846; § possession argues, tion of 21 in U.S.C. Adkins the first time this pseudoephedrine appeal, with intent to manufac- that he was sentenced violation substance, in right by ture a controlled violation of of his Sixth Amendment to trial 841(c); and, possession jury. 21 pos- U.S.C. The PSR asserted that Adkins chemicals, products, grams and mate- sessed 9.59 equipment, methamphetamine, a necessary intent to manufacture metham- fact ten-year rials with to sustain Adkins’s in violation of 21 phetamine, mandatory minimum Assuming sentence. 843(a)(6). finding by The indictment attributed to that a factual trial court as Adkins a “detectable amount of meth- to the amount of the drug pos- Adkins amphetamine,” guilty plea and his did not sessed would violate his Sixth Amendment was, It specific drug quantity. right, state a Adkins is nevertheless not entitled because, respect, that “open” plea. explicitly declining so-called Ac- to relief to to drug amount attributed object to the PSR, that fact. in the Adkins admitted
him Stafford, 258 F.3d States v.
United Cir.2001). Therefore, his Sixth by jury, as inter- right
Amendment trial *3 in a line of Supreme Court
preted to,
cases, v. up including United States
Booker, 220, 738, 160 125 S.Ct. 543 U.S. (2005), was not violated.
L.Ed.2d cogniza- no other presented
Adkins has appeal.
ble claims on
III. sentence, in Adkins’s
Finding error
we AFFIRM. Judge, concurring judgment. I note that
I concur application of a man
this case involves
datory minimum sentence to 21 841(b)(1)(B)(viii). If Adkins had sentence, given
been resentencing
would vacate and remand Barnett, to United States v. — dismissed, Cir.),
F.3d 516
cert.
-,
126 S.Ct.
U.S.
(2005). MELSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Sarah SYNDICATE,
PRIME INSURANCE
INC., Defendant-Appellee. Appeals,
United States Court of Circuit.
Sixth
Argued: Aug. Filed: Nov.
Decided and