Lafromboise

MEMORANDUM *

LaFromboise’s argument regarding grouping and consecutive sentences is based on a misreading of United States v. Archdale, 229 F.3d 861 (9th Cir.2000). The analysis there related to an issue not raised in this case. In Archdale the minimum guidelines exceeded the statutory maximum on one of the counts, so eonseeutivity was imposed to the extent necessary to produce a sentence equal to the bottom of the guideline level. We rejected LaFromboise’s interpretation of § 5G1.2(d) of the Guidelines and of Archdale in our en banc opinion in United States v. Iniguez, 368 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir.2004). We held in that case that the “total punishment” definition in § 5G1.2(d) does not curb the sentencing court’s discretion to sentence “anywhere within the appropriate Guideline sentencing range.” Iniguez, 368 F.3d at 1117 .

The district court did not clearly err in finding that LaFromboise committed his new offense less than two years after his September 5, 1992 release from Montana State Prison. The DEA case agent testified that LaFromboise was one of the distributors in the conspiracy in March, April and May of 1994. He also testified that LaFromboise used violence to enforce a…