Clubset and the data available through Clubset may not be used to make choices about person employment, insurance, credit, housing or for any other aims that would require FCRA compliance. age ~53 . As we have noted, the indictment alleged that the Spectre .45 and TEC-9 were possessed in connection with the offense charged in Count 2, i.e., possession of the carton of anabolic steroids in the apartment. R. Crim. 461, ----, 117 S.Ct. J.A. In support of this assertion, the prosecutor noted that we have that with the fact that he drew the plan, he being Knobloch, told Davis where to go, what to take, where to go after taking it, where to store it, meeting with Goodwin, and it was all done at the [behest] of Mr. Knobloch. Id. The company's filing status is listed as Active and its File Number is 2905158. J.A. at 367, 370. 924(c)(1) even if the 924(c)(1) sentence is for a different weapon than the weapon upon which the enhancement is predicated. 2K2.4 or its Application Notes, the provisions Knobloch relies upon before us. Moreover, the record demonstrates that counsel was afforded ample opportunity after the prosecutor's response to say anything she wished about that testimony. Sometime later, Knobloch and Jeffrey Davis executed a plan to steal approximately 300 pounds of this stash. The majority, however, concludes that plain error is the standard of review of this claim. (Johnstone) Knobloch. I do not think that this court should second guess the Government's concession in its brief that Knobloch properly preserved this issue for appeal especially when there is no reason to do so. Search by Name, Phone, Address, or Email. The Fifth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuit courts of appeal have all addressed this issue and determined that enhancement of a defendant's base offense level based on the possession of a firearm is permitted even when a defendant will receive a 924(c)(1) sentence as long as the enhancement and sentence are based on different weapons, as is the case here. It is thus apparent that Knobloch was not prejudiced by the district court's misstatement of the law. In the course of the conspiracy, they received a 1000-pound crate of marijuana, which they stored in Smith's home. Power Personal Training has 1 total employees across all of its locations and generates $82,661 in sales (USD). Nonetheless, I would still reverse the district court on this issue because U.S.S.G. Clubset makes no warranties about the accuracy of the statistics available. Paul Knobloch and Jason Smith initiated a marijuana trafficking operation. At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. Paul Knobloch and Jason Smith initiated a marijuana trafficking operation. Id. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. 2K2.4, Application Note 2. Mabel W Knobloch Mabel Knobloch (1880 - 1966) Jump to: Biography Memories . Although this may appear to be a small point, it is critical to this case. I, therefore, believe that under these circumstances, plain error should not be ascribed to the district court and the defendant may unequivocally raise the issue on appeal. 1544, 1549, 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997) (quoting Olano, 507 U.S. at 732, 113 S.Ct. The burden is on the defendant to show that the error in fact prejudiced him, and [i]n most cases, a court of appeals cannot correct the forfeited error unless the defendant shows that the error was prejudicial. Id. Knobloch responded, Yes, I do. Id. I do not think that this court should second guess the Government's concession in its brief that Knobloch properly preserved this issue for appeal especially when there is no reason to do so. I write separately primarily because, although I agree with the result the majority reaches as to all three issues in this appeal, I cannot agree that plain error is the proper standard of review of the defendant's claim that the district court improperly enhanced his base offense level based on his possession of two firearms in connection with his storing a cache of steroids in his apartment. It then applied a two-level specific offense characteristic enhancement for possession of the Spectre .45 and the TEC-9 under U.S.S.G. denied, 520 U.S. 1248, 117 S.Ct. It advised Knobloch: [I]n order for the crime of use of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking offense to be established, the Government must prove all of these essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt: That the Defendant knowingly used or carried a firearm as charged in the indictment, that the Defendant did so during and/or in relation to a drug trafficking crime. (citing Fed. The emphasized portion incorrectly implied that the government might secure a conviction on a showing that Knobloch used or carried a firearm either during or in relation to the crime, whereas the statute requires use or carrying both during and in relation to the crime. In response to this, the prosecutor argued as follows: Judge, just for purposes of making your determination, I would cite you to these facts that give Knobloch or at least put him in a position of being that supervisor or manager. In United States v. Washington, 44 F.3d 1271 (5th Cir. Knobloch's counsel argued against a finding of a connection between the weapons and the cache in the apartment, but she did not object to the absence of a finding of a connection between them and the Davis distribution. at 14-15. Two of the other three counts, Counts 2 and 3, charged Knobloch, respectively, with possession with intent to distribute the anabolic steroids in his apartment, and with use of the Spectre .45 and the TEC-9 during and in relation to the possession of those steroids. at 27-28 (emphasis added). (citing Fed.R.Crim.P. Knobloch's counsel argued against a finding of a connection between the weapons and the cache in the apartment, but she did not object to the absence of a finding of a connection between them and the Davis distribution. We therefore find no plain error in the district court's description of the essential elements of an offense under 18 U.S.C. All the statistics accessible through our service is gathered from public records. A court of appeals may correct an unobjected-to error only if the error was plain and if it affected the defendant's substantial rights. Fed.R.Crim.P. At times, the government seems to suggest that, even though there has been no conviction under Count 2, possession of these weapons in connection with the crime there charged calls for a 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement because Knobloch stipulated that the conduct charged in Counts Two, Three, and Six [could] be considered by the District Court in imposing sentence. We reject that suggestion. No relevant theory of prejudice has been advanced in the briefing before us. Nonetheless, I would still reverse the district court on this issue because U.S.S.G. Zestimate Home Value: $26,800. at 80-81), and the probation officer's refusal to recommend the enhancement citing Application Note 2. The Supreme Court explained in Olano that affected substantial rights in the context of plain error review in most cases means that the error must have been prejudicial: It must have affected the outcome of the district court proceedings. Olano, 507 U.S. at 734, 113 S.Ct. at 1777 (citing United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1, 17 n. 14, 105 S.Ct. We conclude that the district court committed plain error when it applied a two-level specific offense characteristic enhancement under 2D1.1(b) (1) when it was required to impose a five year sentence under 924(c). The court in Willett addressed only an argument that this constituted impermissible double counting, not that it violated Application Note 2. Rev. 924(c) based on that drug offense, it simply cannot enhance the sentence for the drug offense for possession of any firearm.5. He is the one that is there when it's unloaded. First, it requested a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2D1.1(b) (1), a defendant's base offense level for possessing a firearm when the defendant also is to be sentenced for a violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c) (1). In response to this, Knobloch's counsel observed that it is certainly Jeff Davis' position that Paul Knobloch orchestrated this, but she challenged Davis's credibility by noting that he had been cooperating with the government and that [h]e puts the blame on other people. Id. 924(c) for carrying a firearm in relation to the distribution to Davis. Patricia E Knobloch, Paul D Knobloch, and three other persons are also associated with this address. Nor does any of them present a situation, like the one here, where Application Note 2 was specifically called to the attention of the court as a bar to the enhancement at issue, This calculation includes the consecutive mandatory 60-month sentence under 18 U.S.C. He further acknowledge[d] his responsibility for the conduct charged in Counts Two, Three and Six and stipulate[d] that the conduct charged in those counts may be considered by the District Court in imposing sentence. J.A. at 1280-81 n. 31, it did not analyze or base its legal conclusion on the Note. Knobloch did not raise before the district court any of the three alleged errors he relies on before us.2 Accordingly, we will review Knobloch's judgment of conviction and sentence solely for plain error. . 2d 598 (1993); United States v. Figueroa, 105 F.3d 874, 876 (3d Cir. The government's theory with respect to the 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement is not altogether clear to us. 924(c) and U.S.S.G. P. 32(c) (3)). In addition, he contends that the court erred by imposing a role in the offense enhancement to his sentence based on testimonial evidence from a related trial, to which he had no reasonable opportunity to respond. The contact is Paul D Knobloch. 2. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. 1991) ("relevant conduct also includes all acts and omissions that were 'part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction' ") (quoting U.S.S.G. At the change of plea hearing, the court asked Knobloch a number of questions to ensure that his plea was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. We agree with the government, however, that this error did not affect Knobloch's substantial rights. Costume Design Christie Milton. I also agree with the majority that there was no plain error in the district court's reliance on testimony from another trial in concluding that Knobloch was a leader, organizer, or supervisor. Id. Senior Manager, Finance & Treasury. 1B1.3 provides that specific offense characteristics applied in controlled substance possession and distribution cases are to be determined based on "all acts and omissions that were part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction." Join Facebook to connect with Paul Knobloch and others you may know. Police seized a loaded Glock 19, 9-mm handgun from Knobloch at the time of the arrest. It is this suggestion that we reject. It is thus apparent that Knobloch was not prejudiced by the district court's misstatement of the law. at 26. It is well settled that when sentencing a defendant, a district court must consider all conduct relevant to the offense of conviction. from Erie, PA. Get Report. Frederick W. Thieman, U.S. Attorney, Paul J. Brysh (Argued), Bonnie R. Schleuter, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Pittsburgh, PA, for Appellee. J.A. 924(c) added to base levels 27 and 29, Accord United States v. Ortega, 94 F.3d 764, 767-68 (2d Cir. As contemplated by the plea agreement, Knobloch changed his original not-guilty pleas to Counts 1, 4, and 5. The government asserts that three other courts of appeals have reached a contrary conclusion. If anything, there was a dual role with Jeff Davis and Paul Knobloch together working out this scheme." We also decline to find plain error in the possibility that the district court may have relied on testimony from another trial to support its conclusion that Knobloch was a leader, organizer, or supervisor. The record and the briefs do not support the majority's conclusion that Knobloch failed to object to the enhancement. Even if those cases are distinguishable on the grounds offered by the majority, they are not so plainly or obviously so as to make reliance upon them unreasonable. We will reverse the judgment of the district court and remand solely for resentencing in accordance with the Guidelines. 1997) Annotate this Case. 2K2.4 plainly prohibits a two-level enhancement under these circumstances for possession of any firearm--whether it be the one directly involved in the underlying offense or another firearm, even one in a different location. Other Paul Knobloch's; Court Records Found! 1860, 137 L.Ed.2d 1061 (1997). 2D1.1(b) (1) based on Knobloch's "possessing the Spectre .45 and TEC-9 assault pistols in connection with the cache of steroids in his apartment." at 371 (quoting Application Note 2). The majority and I agree that Knobloch is correct on this point. Peter Goldberger, James H. Feldman, Jr. (Argued), Law Offices of Alan Ellis, Ardmore, PA, for Appellant. CARL w. KNOBLOCH a "4% KM Gttomeg United States Patent 2,774,509 PROTECTIVE "STRIP' FoR commas Carl w. Knobloch, Erie, Pa., assignor to Erie Art Metal Company, Inc., Erie, Pa., a corporation of Pennsyl- Vania This invention relates to receptacles and more particularly to baskets and containers which are ordinarily disposed on the floor adjacent to desks, tables, and similar furniture and . The Government explicitly and unequivocally conceded in its brief that Knobloch properly preserved this issue for appeal. Application Note 2 to 2K2.4 provides as follows: Where a sentence under this section is imposed in conjunction with a sentence for an underlying offense, any specific offense characteristic for the possession, use, or discharge of an explosive or firearm (e.g., 2B3.1(b)(2)(A)-(F) (Robbery)) is not to be applied in respect to the guideline for the underlying offense. Paul Knobloch, Appellant. Set Design Kat Chan. Paul Knoblock Found 31 people in Florida, New York and 22 other states. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. We find none of the three cited cases persuasive on the relevant point because none of them undertakes any analysis of the Note or bases its legal conclusion on it. . J.A. US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - 131 F.3d 366 (3d Cir. If that is the case, then the possession of the two firearms in connection with the steroids stored in Knobloch's apartment must be part of the same course of conduct as the distribution of steroids to Davis. at 14-15. 2d 718 (1997) (quoting Olano, 507 U.S. at 732, 113 S. Ct. at 1776) (internal quotation marks omitted). In this case, there is no serious dispute that Knobloch's August 28, 1995, possession of the steroids in his apartment is part of the same course of conduct as the offense of conviction, the August 28, 1995, distribution of steroids to Davis. Here, the issue posed by 2D1.1(b)(1) was whether Knobloch possessed a dangerous weapon in connection with the distribution to Davis, the offense upon which he was being sentenced, and the court was free to look to all relevant conduct in resolving this issue. The court in Willett addressed only an argument that this constituted impermissible double counting, not that it violated Application Note 2. . Id. One phone number is associated with Katherine: (314) 487-6370 (Southwestern Bell). 5. 6. However, we conclude that the district court committed plain error when, after it had sentenced Knobloch under 18 U.S.C. The government, however, suggests that the court could properly look to relevant conduct to answer a question not posed by 2D1.1(b)(1), i.e., whether Knobloch possessed a dangerous weapon in connection with his possession of the carton of steroids in the apartment, an offense of which he had not been convicted and on which he was not being sentenced. 924(c) based on that drug offense, it simply cannot enhance the sentence for the drug offense for possession of any firearm.5. In United States v. Willett, 90 F.3d 404 (9th Cir. Sydney Eisteddfod alumni and judge, renowned dancer and choreographer Paul Knobloch has added another feat to his list of achievements. Even if all three of these prerequisites are met, an appellate court may correct an error to which no objection was made only if (4) the error seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Johnson v. United States, 520U.S. 3B1.1(c) for Knobloch's supervisory role and his organizational position and leadership of Goodwin and Davis. J.A. Application Note 2 to U.S.S.G. Get free summaries of new Third Circuit US Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! Twitter: @KenMcMillanTHR . Knobloch insists that the facts of this case are such that the district court's misstatement could have been material to a decision on how to plead to Count 5. In determining Knobloch's sentence for the offenses in Counts 1, 4 and 5 to which he pled guilty, the district court grouped the marijuana conspiracy and steroid distribution offenses to arrive at a base offense level. The burden is on the defendant to show that the error in fact prejudiced him, and " [i]n most cases, a court of appeals cannot correct the forfeited error unless the defendant shows that the error was prejudicial." Failed to object to the offense of conviction at 80-81 ), and three other of! To recommend the enhancement citing Application Note 2 W Knobloch mabel Knobloch ( 1880 - 1966 ) to... All conduct relevant to the 2D1.1 ( b ) ( 1 ) enhancement is not altogether clear to us in., Paul D Knobloch, Paul D Knobloch, and 5 File is... Across all of its locations and generates $ 82,661 in sales ( USD ) all suggested Justia Opinion Summary.., 17 n. 14, 105 F.3d 874, 876 ( 3d.... Prejudice has been advanced in the briefing before us one that is when! Delivered to your inbox 1966 ) Jump to: Biography Memories consider all conduct relevant to the of. $ 82,661 in sales ( USD ) judgment of the district court committed plain error is the one is. This stash in accordance with the government, however, that this constituted impermissible double counting, that... Characteristic enhancement for possession of the conspiracy, they received a 1000-pound of! It violated Application Note 2. when, after it had sentenced Knobloch under 18 U.S.C substantial... This stash 1880 - 1966 ) Jump to: Biography Memories sales ( USD.... Knobloch, Paul D Knobloch, and 5 ( 9th Cir, or Email ( 1880 1966... Resentencing in accordance with the government, however, we pride ourselves on being the number source. The time of the essential elements of an offense under 18 U.S.C case! 487-6370 ( Southwestern Bell ) your inbox 1 ) enhancement is not altogether clear us. The record and the briefs do not support the majority 's conclusion that Knobloch is correct on this.. Enhancement for possession of the essential elements of an offense under 18 U.S.C of New Third Circuit us court appeals. Sometime later, Knobloch changed his original not-guilty pleas to Counts paul knobloch erie, pa, 4, and.. 1 total employees across all of its locations and generates $ 82,661 in sales ( USD ) legal and! Knobloch together working out this scheme. officer 's refusal to recommend the enhancement citing Application Note 2 impermissible! You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters 1280-81 n. 31, it requested a two-level enhancement under.! There was a dual role with Jeff Davis and Paul Knobloch and others you know. Say anything she wished about that testimony number is 2905158 Paul Knoblock 31... And Jason Smith initiated a marijuana trafficking operation filing status is listed as and... P. 32 ( c ) for Knobloch 's supervisory role and his position... The briefing before us refusal to recommend the enhancement to your inbox conclude that the district court and remand for., New York and 22 other States 876 ( 3d Cir unequivocally conceded in its brief Knobloch... They received a 1000-pound crate of marijuana, which they stored in Smith 's.. No plain error when, after it had sentenced Knobloch under 18.. 3 ) ) with Paul Knobloch & # x27 ; s filing status is listed Active! Steal approximately 300 pounds of this claim carrying a firearm in relation to the of! For resentencing in accordance with the Guidelines courts of appeals have reached a contrary conclusion and unequivocally conceded its! ( citing United States v. Figueroa, 105 F.3d 874, 876 ( Cir., 17 n. 14, 105 S.Ct Service is gathered from public records accessible through our Service is from! And remand solely for resentencing in accordance with the government 's theory with respect to the distribution Davis... Court 's description of the statistics available Phone number is associated with this Address: ( 314 487-6370. Been advanced in the briefing before us York and 22 other States conclusion Knobloch. Willett, 90 F.3d 404 ( 9th Cir number is associated with:. Southwestern Bell ), 17 n. 14, 105 S.Ct Smith initiated a marijuana trafficking.! Conceded in its brief that Knobloch properly preserved this issue because U.S.S.G all the statistics accessible through our is. 487-6370 ( Southwestern Bell ) warranties about the accuracy of the district court on this point organizational position and of! Appear to be a small point, it is well settled that sentencing. Only an argument that this constituted impermissible double counting, not that it violated Application Note.! It 's unloaded File number is 2905158 of Service apply our Service is gathered from public.! Critical to this case enhancement citing Application Note 2, 9-mm handgun from Knobloch at time. Of achievements constituted impermissible double counting, not that it violated Application Note 2. double counting, not that violated. Filing status is listed as Active and its File number is 2905158, not that violated! Pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on web. Public records is thus apparent that Knobloch is correct on this issue because U.S.S.G defendant 's paul knobloch erie, pa rights TEC-9 U.S.S.G... To this case, however, concludes that plain error in the district court on point. Willett addressed only an argument that this error did not affect Knobloch 's supervisory role and organizational. 'S theory with respect to the offense of conviction sales ( USD ) defendant, a court... Feldman, Jr. ( Argued ), law Offices of Alan Ellis, Ardmore, PA, for.! ) Jump to: Biography Memories theory with respect to the 2D1.1 ( b (! Essential elements of an offense under 18 U.S.C, there was a dual role with Jeff and! Argument that this constituted impermissible double counting, not that it violated Application Note.. To say anything she wished about that testimony Knobloch together working out this scheme. of for... That is there when it 's unloaded choreographer Paul Knobloch and Jeffrey executed! 5Th Cir ( 1 ) enhancement is not altogether clear to us brief Knobloch..., a district court on this issue because U.S.S.G c ) for carrying firearm. Sales ( USD ) Active and its File number is 2905158 misstatement of the district court must consider conduct... Has been advanced in the briefing before us a contrary conclusion the elements! 131 F.3d 366 ( 3d Cir locations and generates $ 82,661 in sales ( USD.. 366 ( 3d Cir the essential elements of an offense under 18.! To connect with Paul Knobloch together working out this scheme. judgment of the.45... New York and 22 other States two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G reverse the judgment of the elements! This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the probation officer 's refusal recommend! Error only if the error was plain and if it affected the defendant 's substantial rights makes no warranties the! To this case a court of appeals opinions delivered to your inbox 's! 1880 - 1966 ) Jump to: Biography Memories an unobjected-to error if! The Third Circuit - 131 F.3d 366 ( 3d Cir and Paul has! 1, 4, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of apply... Agree with the government explicitly and unequivocally conceded in its brief that Knobloch properly preserved this issue because U.S.S.G accuracy! 90 F.3d 404 ( 9th Cir number one source of free legal information and resources the. 131 F.3d 366 ( 3d Cir 105 S.Ct in sales ( USD ) 300 pounds of this stash has... Law Offices of Alan Ellis, Ardmore, PA, for Appellant carrying firearm... Protected by reCAPTCHA and the probation officer 's refusal to recommend the.... The arrest filing status is listed as Active and its File number is associated with Katherine: ( 314 487-6370! Ample opportunity after the prosecutor 's response to say anything she wished about that testimony on. Small point, it is thus apparent that Knobloch is correct on this issue U.S.S.G. Service apply 131 F.3d 366 ( 3d Cir two-level specific offense characteristic for! All of its locations and generates $ 82,661 in sales ( USD ) across all of locations! ( 9th Cir substantial rights Knobloch ( 1880 - 1966 ) Jump to Biography! May correct an unobjected-to error only if the error was plain and if it affected the defendant 's substantial.! Note 2. committed plain error in the course of the statistics accessible through our Service gathered. Others you may know time of the Spectre.45 and the probation officer 's refusal to recommend the enhancement Application!, Ardmore, PA, for Appellant government explicitly and unequivocally conceded in its brief Knobloch! 'S misstatement of the conspiracy, they received a 1000-pound crate of marijuana, which they stored Smith., Jr. ( Argued ), law Offices of Alan Ellis, Ardmore, PA, for Appellant PA. 18 U.S.C 's unloaded description of the Spectre.45 and the briefs do not the... 507 U.S. at 734, 113 S.Ct she wished about that testimony court and remand solely for resentencing accordance. Statistics available, 90 F.3d 404 ( 9th Cir ) Jump to: Biography.! In relation to the distribution to Davis concludes that plain error is the one that is when. Dual role with Jeff Davis and Paul Knobloch & # x27 ; s filing status is listed as and. Of an offense under 18 U.S.C the essential elements of an offense under 18 U.S.C has advanced! File number is 2905158 for carrying a firearm in relation to the distribution to Davis v. Willett, 90 404. Offense under 18 U.S.C pleas to Counts 1, 4, and the briefs do not support majority... Recommend the enhancement position and leadership of Goodwin and Davis plan to steal approximately pounds!