Lafley
United States v. Lafley
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Charles Lafley challenges his sentence, contending that the district court erred by (1) applying USSG § 4Al.l(d) to increase his criminal history category and (2) refusing to apply USSG § 3B1.2(b) to reduce his offense level. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
*842 DISCUSSION
1. USSG § JpAl.l
The Sentencing Guidelines provide for two criminal history points “if the defendant committed the instance offense while under any criminal justice sentence, including probation, parole, supervised release, imprisonment, work release, or escape status.” USSG § 4Al.l(d). A “criminal justice sentence” must have a “custodial or supervisory component, although active supervision is not required for the [section] to apply.” USSG § 4A1.1, comment, (n.4).
Lafley argues that § 4Al.l(d) does not apply because his state sentence was suspended without supervision. He relies on United States v. Kipp, 10 F.3d 1463, 1467 (9th Cir.1993), where we held that a suspended sentence does not invoke § 4Al.l(d) unless the record indicates a “supervisory component.” The record here, however, supports the district court’s conclusion that “there was a supervision…