Background
Shantia Stovall appealed his sentence of sixty months imprisonment for possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. He argued the district court improperly applied the United States Sentencing Guidelines cross-reference for attempted murder by relying on Alabama state definitions and disputed facts.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the district court’s application of the Guidelines de novo and factual findings for clear error. It held that absent a stipulation or agreement, an attorney’s factual assertions at a sentencing hearing do not constitute evidence. The district court had relied on the presentence investigation report and the government’s counsel’s statements regarding bystanders, but Stovall had objected to these facts and no additional evidence was submitted. Consequently, the government failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the cross-reference was properly applied.
What it means going forward
The sentence was vacated and the case remanded for resentencing without the improper enhancement.