Case: 11-40798 Document: 00512070662 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/03/2012
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
December 3, 2012
No. 11-40798
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
EDWARD DAVID ROSA,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:09-CR-260-1
Before WIENER, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant-Appellant Edward David Rosa appeals his sentence following
his guilty plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. He argues
that the district court erred in increasing his base offense level by two levels
pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(3)(B) and assigning a base offense level of 20
pursuant to § 2K1.1(a)(4)(B) because the pipe bomb found at his residence did
not constitute a destructive device.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
Case: 11-40798 Document: 00512070662 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/03/2012
No. 11-40798
We have determined that a pipe bomb is a destructive device under
§ 5845(f). See United States v. Hunn, 344 F. App’x 920, 921 (5th Cir. 2009)
(finding that homemade pipe bomb was a destructive device under § 5845(f));
United States v. Charles, 883 F.2d 355, 357 (5th Cir. 1989) (concluding that three
pipe bombs were destructive devices under § 5845(f)). Thus, the district court
did not clearly err in enhancing Rosa’s sentence pursuant to § 2K2.1(b)(3)(B) or
in assigning a base offense level of 20 pursuant to § 2K2.1(a)(4)(B). See United
States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, the
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2