United States Sixth Circuit

A sentence pursuant to a plea to possession of ammunition is affirmed over challenges to the district court's possession-of-a-shotgun enhancement arguing that: 1) he did not possess the shotgun; 2) the "relevant conduct" provisions of the sentencing guidelines do not apply to this conduct; 3) the sentencing guidelines preclude courts from enhancing sentences based on charged conduct where the government later dismisses the charge in connection with a plea agreement; 4) the plea agreement in this case barred the enhancement; and 5) the Sixth Amendment barred the enhancement.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/23/2008
• Published 01/23/2008

Judges

• Before: ROGERS and SUTTON, Circuit Judges;  BERTELSMAN, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ON BRIEF:  Thomas M. Tyack, Tyack, Blackmore & Liston Co., Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  Gary L. Spartis, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellee.