[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
APRIL 29, 2005
No. 04-13622 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 04-14007-CR-DMM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RONALD KEITH WYATT,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(April 29, 2005)
Before BIRCH, BLACK and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Ronald Keith Wyatt appeals his 120-month sentence, imposed after he pled
guilty to one count of conspiring to manufacture five grams or more of
methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846. Wyatt argues there
was insufficient evidence to support a three-level enhancement imposed pursuant
to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(5)(B).1 Wyatt further asserts the enhancement was
imposed based on facts found by a preponderance of the evidence, thus violating
Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004).
Wyatt’s Presentence Investigation Report (PSI) calculated a base offense
level of 26, with a three-level specific offense characteristic increase, pursuant to
U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(5)(B), giving an adjusted offense level of 29. The PSI further
recommended a two-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, pursuant to
U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a), and a one-level reduction for assisting authorities, pursuant to
§ 3E1.1(b). Thus, Wyatt’s total recommended offense level was 26. Based on
various prior convictions, the PSI calculated a criminal history category of III,
which with an offense level of 26 resulted in an imprisonment range of 78 to 97
months. However, the statutory mandatory minimum for Wyatt’s crime is 120
months, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
1
We refer to the November 2003 edition of the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
The text of § 2D1.1(b)(5)(B) has moved to § 2D1.1(b)(6)(B) in the November 2004 version.
2
Wyatt’s ultimate sentence of 120 months was not determined based upon an
application of the federal sentencing guidelines, but was based upon the mandatory
minimum sentence set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 841(a). Even though the district court
held the U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(5)(B) enhancement applied, the enhancement is moot
given the mandatory minimum sentence. Thus, if any error exists in the imposition
of the enhancement, that error is harmless. Additionally, Wyatt’s Blakely
argument is without merit, as his ultimate sentence was based on the statutory
mandatory minimum sentence, rather than the federal sentencing guidelines.
Neither Blakely or United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), affect Wyatt’s
sentence. See United States v. Vieth, 397 F.3d 615, 620 (8th Cir. 2005).
Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
3