U.S. v. Moore

Dist. Ct. erred in sentencing defendant to 120-month term of incarceration on various drug offenses, where Dist. Ct. based said sentence, in part, on finding that 55.6 grams of methamphetamine found in defendant’s home was 100 percent pure. Record showed that chemist affidavit submitted by defendant was “some evidence” sufficient to call purity finding into question, where defendant’s chemist explained that exact purity could not be determined with DEA’s method, and that purity level of defendant’s drugs could be substantially lower than what DEA had reported. While Dist. Ct. held belief that defendant had failed to present sufficient evidence that DEA’s protocols were not reliable so as to shift burden on government to establish purity level, Ct. of Appeals found that remand for new sentencing hearing was required, where: (1) reliability of DEA’s finding was sufficiently questioned by defendant’s chemist; (2) government chose to rest on assumption that DEA had reliable and generally accepted methods of testing drug purity; and (3) instant unsupported assumption did not indicate whether test results in defendant’s particular case can be reasonably relied upon. Fact that defendant had failed to carry out his own purity test did not require different result. (Dissent filed.)