United States v. Barfield, No. 18-50399 (5th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's 360 month sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. The court rejected defendant's contention that the weekly meth transactions to which he confessed should not have been considered relevant conduct, and held that they were part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan under Fifth Circuit precedent.
The court held that, where a defendant does not introduce evidence to rebut his post-arrest admission of relevant conduct, the district court may consider it at sentencing. In this case, the district court did not clearly err by relying on the presentence report's account of a defendant's post-arrest, Mirandized admission of relevant conduct where defendant had objected to the reliability of his own statement but failed to introduce evidence to rebut it.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.