United States v. Kenneth Bowlan

359 F. App'x 719
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedNovember 13, 2009
Docket08-30479
StatusUnpublished

This text of 359 F. App'x 719 (United States v. Kenneth Bowlan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Kenneth Bowlan, 359 F. App'x 719 (9th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Kenneth Bowlan appeals from the 84-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

*720 We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s determination that hearsay testimony was sufficiently reliable to establish drug quantity for sentencing purposes. See United States v. Berry, 258 F.3d 971, 976 (9th Cir.2001). Because the hearsay statements regarding the quantity of drugs that Bowlan possessed were neither inherently reliable nor corroborated by extrinsic evidence, the district court abused its discretion by relying on them. See United States v. Huckins, 53 F.3d 276, 279-80 (9th Cir.1995). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for resen-tencing on an open record pursuant to United States v. Matthews, 278 F.3d 880, 889-90 (9th Cir.2002) (en banc).

The district court did not violate Bowlan’s Fifth or Sixth Amendment rights by imposing a sentence based on a drug quantity that was neither proved to a jury nor admitted. Because the district court properly treated the Guidelines as advisory and sentenced Bowlan below the statutory maximum, there was no constitutional violation. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 233, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. William James Huckins
53 F.3d 276 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)
United States v. Charles Robinson Berry
258 F.3d 971 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)
United States v. James Earl Matthews
278 F.3d 880 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
359 F. App'x 719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-kenneth-bowlan-ca9-2009.