Goble
United States v. Goble
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Mark J. Goble appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized from his motor home. He also appeals his sentence. We conclude that the district court correctly denied Go-ble’s motion to suppress. 1 Although the issue is a close one, the facts that Deputy O’Toole asked, and did not order, Goble to answer questions, and that law enforcement did not pull Goble over but simply summoned him from his already-parked mobile home, weigh sufficiently in favor of a voluntary encounter to allow us to affirm. 2 Accordingly, we affirm the conviction.
The Government conceded that it failed to offer sufficient proof to justify the two-point enhancement to Goble’s sentence under United States Sentencing Guideline § 2Dl.l(b)(5) (2000). Accordingly, we vacate Goble’s sentence and remand for plenary re-sentencing.
THE CONVICTION IS AFFIRMED; THE SENTENCE IS VACATED AND REMANDED.
THOMAS, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part.
Given the government’s proper concession that it failed to offer sufficient proof to justify a sentence enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(5), I agree that the sentence must be vacated and the case…