U.S. v. Barker

Dist. Ct. did not err in imposing below-Guidelines, 300-month term of incarceration on drug distribution charges, even though defendant argued that he was entitled to new sentencing hearing because Dist. Ct. improperly: (1) relied on unreliable hearsay statement that drugs and firearms in trash bag belonged to defendant, where said statement was used to increase his offense level and to impose certain enhancements; and (2) applied obstruction of justice enhancement based on telephone call defendant made to third-party to remove said drugs and firearms shortly after defendant became aware that his second home was subject to search warrant. Normal rules of evidence, including admissibility of hearsay statements, do not apply to sentencing hearings, and instant hearsay statement was reliable, where police observed third-party remove trash bag containing drugs and firearms from defendant's second home shortly after defendant became aware of search warrant, and where phone records and police observations corroborated hearsay statement. Ct. also emphasized that best practice is for Dist. Ct. to order declarant to appear and testify, where subject-matter of hearsay statement could dramatically increase defendant’s guidelines range. Dist. Ct. could also impose obstruction of justice enhancement, where Dist. Ct. could have found that defendant’s instruction to remove drugs and firearms from his second home was motivated by his attempt to conceal evidence.