Opinions of the United
2003 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
2-26-2003
USA v. Irvin
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket 02-2477
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2003
Recommended Citation
"USA v. Irvin" (2003). 2003 Decisions. Paper 789.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2003/789
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2003 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 02-2477
___________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.
TERRANCE IRVIN
a/k/a
Terrence Irvin
Terrance Irvin,
Appellant
___________
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
(D.C. Criminal No. 01-cr-00072)
District Judge: The Honorable William W. Caldwell
___________
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
January 21, 2003
BEFORE: BECKER, Chief Judge, NYGAARD, and AMBRO, Circuit Judges.
(Filed February 26, 2003)
___________
OPINION OF THE COURT
___________
NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.
Appellant, Terrance Irvin, was convicted following a jury trial of (1)
distribution and possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 841(a)(1); and (2) knowingly receiving in interstate commerce a firearm with an
obliterated serial number in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(k). He was sentenced to a term of
imprisonment of 51 months with credit for 12 months already served. In this appeal he
contends that the District Court erred by attributing 77 bags of crack cocaine to him in
computing his sentencing. We will affirm.
The facts and legal procedure of this case are well known to counsel, the
parties, and the District Court, so we will not restate them here. We review the District
Court’s determination of drug quantity for clear error. The determination must be
supported by a preponderance of the evidence. See e.g., United States v. Gibbs, 190 F.3d
188, 203 (3d Cir. 1999). It is enough to say that there was sufficient evidence at trial,
which if accepted as credible by the jury, would establish that 77 bags should indeed be
attributable to appellant. Moreover, the total weight of drugs attributable to Irvin exceeds
the quantity necessary to support the Guideline range, if the Court merely takes the 39 bags
conceded by Irvin, multiplied by the drug weight of .25 grams per bag established by expert
testimony. The District Court made specific factual findings on the record at the
2
sentencing hearing, which the evidence supports. Thus, whether one accepts the findings of
the District Court at sentencing based upon the sworn testimony at trial, or the alternative
method noted above, there is sufficient evidence to support the sentence imposed on
appellant. We will affirm.
_________________________
TO THE CLERK:
Please file the foregoing opinion.
/s/ Richard L. Nygaard
Circuit Judge
3