United States v. Stephen Robert Gunning

Stephen R. Gunning pleaded guilty to wire fraud. He appeals to contest the terms of his sentence. We remand for additional findings and modification, or for resentencing if necessary.

Gunning contends that he was entitled to the 2-level decrease for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to sentencing guideline 3E1.1. The district court found that he did not exhibit a clear acceptance of responsibility because he was blaming others for what he did. That finding is not clearly erroneous.

Gunning contends that he was only a minor participant in the scheme to defraud investors and that he was entitled to a 2-level reduction pursuant to guideline 3B1.2(b). The presentence report made no recommendation regarding a minor-role adjustment, and the court made no findings. We require the sentencing court to “ ‘make clear on the record its resolution of all disputed matters....”’ In the absence of a specific finding by the district court, or of a recommendation by the probation office which the district court adopted, we cannot discern whether the district court considered whether a minor-role adjustment was warranted. Because it is for the district court to rule on sentencing…