United States of America v. Aaron Geddes

Honorable Jane A. Restani, Chief Judge of the United States Court of*
International Trade, sitting by designation.
1
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
______
No. 06-3335
______
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee
v.
AARON GEDDES,
Appellant
Appeal from the
United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey
(D.C. No. 02-cr-00705)
District Judge: Honorable Mary L. Cooper
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
December 11, 2007
Before: SLOVITER, AMBRO, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI , Judge*
(Filed: December 20, 2007)
OPINION

-- 1 of 2 --

Judge Sloviter agrees that Grier represents the law of the Circuit. Nonetheless,1
she believes that Geddes’ argument represents the better view, as set forth in her dissent
in Grier.
2
RESTANI, Judge.
This appeal challenges a sentence imposed after remand to apply the United States
Sentencing Guidelines in an advisory manner as required by United States v. Booker,
543 U.S. 220 (2005). Defendant Aaron Geddes was found guilty of violation of
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession of a firearm). In calculating the Guidelines
range, the District Court imposed a four-level enhancement for using a firearm in
connection with another felony. The District Court found that the facts necessary to the
enhancement were established by a preponderance of the evidence.
Geddes’ sole argument on appeal is that due process requires that if a separate
crime is the basis for a sentencing enhancement, the elements of that crime must be found
by the trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt. Sitting en banc, we recently rejected this
argument, see United States v. Grier, 475 F.3d 556 (3d Cir. 2007), and held that
sentencing enhancements, whether constituting a separate offense or not, do not implicate
rights to a jury trial or proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. at 567.1
Accordingly, we will affirm.

-- 2 of 2 --