Deitzen

United States v. Deitzen

Good Law
110 F. App'x 747
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 8, 2004No. 03-10497California678 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Christopher Deitzen pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g). At sentencing on September 8, 2003, the district court enhanced Deitzen’s base offense level by four levels under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) (2002) for possessing a firearm in connection with another felony offense. Deitzen appeals his sentence, challenging the enhancement.

Deitzen maintains that the district court did not make specific factual findings on an issue he contested at sentencing: whether he had the state of mind requisite for the felony of possession of a stolen vehicle under Nevada law. Nev.Rev.Stat. 205.273(l)(b) (“A person commits an offense involving a stolen vehicle if the person: ... [h]as in his possession a motor vehicle which he knows or has reason to believe has been stolen.’’) (emphasis added). Under U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3(b) (2002), the district court “shall resolve disputed sentencing factors at a sentencing hearing in accordance with Rule 32(c)(1), Fed. R.Crim.P.” At the time, Rule 32(c)(1) required in relevant part,

Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(1) (2002) (emphasis added) (quoted portion now found, with modifications, in various subsections of Rule…

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.