United States v. Paris Lyes ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 18-1488
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Paris Clevont’e Lyes
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Iowa - Waterloo
    ____________
    Submitted: January 14, 2019
    Filed: May 31, 2019
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before SMITH, Chief Judge, COLLOTON and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Paris Lyes pleaded guilty to being a drug user in possession of a firearm, in
    violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(3) and 924(a)(2). The district court1 sentenced him
    to 46 months’ imprisonment. We affirm.
    1
    The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern
    District of Iowa.
    In July 2016, Lyes applied for a permit to carry a firearm. While completing the
    application, Lyes represented that he did not use illegal drugs. Lyes received the
    permit and purchased a Glock 9mm pistol, a Mossberg .22 caliber pistol, and a
    Romarm/Cugir 7.62x39mm pistol.
    In July 2017, police conducted a traffic stop of Lyes’s vehicle. Upon searching
    the vehicle, they discovered marijuana, a digital scale, and several small baggies. In
    a post-Miranda interview, Lyes admitted to regularly using and selling marijuana.
    Specifically, Lyes stated he had been using marijuana for the past five years, as well
    as selling two ounces of marijuana every three weeks.
    Two weeks later, police obtained a warrant and searched Lyes’s residence.
    They recovered a loaded Glock 9mm pistol, a magazine of Glock ammunition, .380
    caliber ammunition, a marijuana grinder, rolling papers, a digital scale, and
    counterfeit bills—all from the same bedroom. Later that same day, police observed
    Lyes leaving his girlfriend’s house with a duffle bag, putting the bag in the trunk of
    his car, and driving off. Police then located the parked car and searched it pursuant
    to a warrant. They recovered the Mossberg .22 caliber pistol, the Romarm/Cugir
    7.62x39mm pistol, several large capacity magazines, and 831 rounds of assorted
    ammunition, as well as masks, bandannas, and gloves. Police then arrested Lyes.
    This time, during his post-Miranda interview, Lyes attempted to retract his
    previous admission of marijuana use, claiming he had been only an occasional
    marijuana user at the time he purchased his guns. He did, however, admit to using
    marijuana since the traffic stop—an admission confirmed by urine testing. He also
    admitted to transporting his guns from his girlfriend’s house. Lyes’s girlfriend later
    testified to having seen one of Lyes’s guns inside his car sometime after April 2017.
    Lyes’s presentence report (PSR) calculated an adjusted offense level of 26,
    including a four-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for
    -2-
    possessing a firearm in connection with another felony—here, possession with intent
    to distribute and distribution of marijuana, in violation of Iowa Code § 124.401(1)(d).
    The PSR reduced Lyes’s total offense level to 23 based on his acceptance of
    responsibility.
    Lyes objected to the § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement, arguing the evidence did
    not establish that he possessed a firearm in connection with possession with intent to
    distribute and distribution of marijuana. The district court overruled the objection and
    determined that Lyes’s total offense level was 23, his criminal history category was
    I, and his advisory sentencing range was 46–57 months’ imprisonment. The court
    sentenced Lyes to 46 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Lyes renews his objection
    to the § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement.
    The Guidelines call for a four-level enhancement if the defendant “used or
    possessed any firearm or ammunition in connection with another felony offense; or
    possessed or transferred any firearm or ammunition with knowledge, intent, or reason
    to believe that it would be used or possessed in connection with another felony
    offense.” U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). The enhancement applies
    in the case of a drug trafficking offense in which a firearm is found in
    close proximity to drugs, drug-manufacturing materials, or drug
    paraphernalia. In these cases, application of subsection[] (b)(6)(B) . . .
    is warranted because the presence of the firearm has the potential of
    facilitating another felony offense.
    U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), cmt.14(B).
    In applying the enhancement, we have differentiated between drug possession
    and drug trafficking offenses. “[W]ith the addition of Application Note 14 [in 2006],
    the Sentencing Commission decided to make a distinction between the factual
    circumstances of when the other felony was a drug trafficking offense, or
    -3-
    alternatively, a simple drug possession offense.” United States v. Blankenship, 
    552 F.3d 703
    , 705 (8th Cir. 2009).
    [W]hen the defendant . . . possesses a ‘user’ amount of drugs and is not
    a trafficker, instead of automatically applying the adjustment when both
    drugs and weapons are involved in the offense, the district court must
    affirmatively make a finding that the weapon or weapons facilitated the
    drug offense before applying the adjustment.
    
    Id. However, “[i]f
    the felony is for drug trafficking, Application Note 14(B) mandates
    application of the adjustment if guns and drugs are in the same location.” 
    Id. Lyes’s “other
    felony” was a trafficking offense, and his firearm and drug
    paraphernalia were discovered in the same location. Consequently, the district court
    was not required to find that the firearms facilitated the drug offense. See 
    id. Because §
    2K2.1(b)(6)(B) encompasses both drugs and drug paraphernalia, Blankenship’s
    conclusion that the enhancement must apply if the “other felony” is for drug
    trafficking applies here. See 
    id. Furthermore, the
    district court possessed sufficient evidence to find that Lyes
    trafficked drugs and that his firearms facilitated that trafficking. See United States v.
    Littrell, 
    557 F.3d 616
    , 617 (8th Cir. 2009) (adopting a preponderance of the evidence
    standard for determining whether “another state or federal felony offense” was
    committed for § 2K2.1(b)(6) purposes). Lyes admitted to distributing drugs, and his
    firearms and ammunition were found in the same room with the evidence of drug
    trafficking. See United States v. Buchanan, 
    604 F.3d 517
    , 520 (8th Cir. 2010) (finding
    digital scale and baggies to be items consistent with drug distribution). Testimony
    from Lyes’s girlfriend also indicated that Lyes carried a firearm in his car, and the
    police found evidence of drug trafficking in his car during the July 2017 traffic stop.
    -4-
    We thus conclude the district court did not err in imposing the four-level
    enhancement. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    -5-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-1488

Filed Date: 5/31/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 5/31/2019