United States v. Prien-Pinto, No. 18-30055 (9th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
The Ninth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence and held that the strict liability enhancement of USSG 2K2.1(b)(4), for the commission of a crime with a stolen firearm, is constitutional. The panel joined its sister circuits and reaffirmed the holding of United States v. Goodell, 990 F.3d 497 (9th Cir. 1993), that the lack of a mens rea requirement in section 2K2.1(b)(4) does not violate due process. The panel also held that Application Note 8(B) simply serves as confirmation that Goodell's reading has always been the correct one.
The panel held that subsequent Supreme Court opinions recasting the role the Guidelines play in a district court's sentencing decision did not affect Goodell. The panel failed to understand how the Supreme Court's Sixth Amendment jurisprudence requiring that all facts leading to a sentence enhancement beyond the statutory maximum be proven to a jury overrules the long-settled position that the Fifth Amendment permits a sentencing enhancement for possession of a stolen firearm to apply on a strict-liability basis.
Court Description: Criminal Law. Affirming a sentence, the panel held that the strict- liability enhancement of U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(4), for the commission of a crime with a stolen firearm, is constitutional. Joining ten other circuits, the panel reaffirmed the holding of United States v. Goodell, 990 F.3d 497 (9th Cir. 1993), that the lack of a mens rea requirement in § 2K2.1(b)(4) does not violate due process. The panel wrote that subsequently- issued Application Note 8(B), directing courts not to impose a mens rea requirement, served as confirmation of Goodell’s analysis of the plain language and legislative history of the enhancement. Further, the Supreme Court’s Sixth Amendment jurisprudence requiring that all facts leading to a sentencing enhancement beyond the statutory maximum be proven to a jury did not overrule the long-settled position that the Fifth Amendment permits a sentencing enhancement for possession of a stolen firearm to apply on a strict-liability basis. UNITED STATES V. PRIEN-PINTO 3
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.