United States v. Horace Littlesun

Good Law
444 F.3d 1196·2006 WL 1044222·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 10040
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 21, 200604-30300California2,337 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

We publish this opinion to resolve whether, after Crawford v. Washington, it is appropriate to use hearsay testimony during sentencing. We join each of our sister circuits who have considered the issue in concluding that it is.

FACTS

Horace Littlesun, his wife, and numerous others conspired to sell and sold methamphetamine on the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation in Montana. Their inventory came from several out-of-state individuals the reservation residents called “the Mexicans.”

Littlesun pled guilty to selling 3.7 grams of methamphetamine to an undercover informant, but the sentencing judge held him accountable for 32.5 grams. The approximate one ounce difference generated a guideline adjustment that lengthened Littlesun’s sentence. Littlesun’s wife had told a Bureau of Indian Affairs agent that her husband had sold the additional ounce, but she did not testify at Littlesun’s sentencing hearing. The BIA agent who interviewed her testified to what she had told him. The sentencing judge believed the agent and imposed the quantity adjustment accordingly. Littlesun was also denied a downward adjustment for minor or minimal role in the conspiracy, partly on the basis of what…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.