|
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JAMES WITTINGEN, Defendant-Appellant. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland.
No. 06-00203—John R. Adams, District Judge.
Argued: October 26, 2007
Decided and Filed: March 27, 2008
Before: MERRITT, ROGERS, and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges.
McKEAGUE, Circuit Judge. Defendant James Wittingen pleaded guilty to one federal count of distributing methamphetamine, a controlled substance. Finding that the applicable sentencing range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (the “Guidelines” or “U.S.S.G.”) was higher than that proposed by either Wittingen, the Government, or the probation office, the district court sentenced Wittingen to fifty-seven months of imprisonment. Wittingen appeals, arguing that his sentence was unreasonable under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).
We find no basis for reversing the sentence. Wittingen admitted to an officer that he manufactured approximately 270 grams of methamphetamine over an eighteen-month period. While he stated to the officer that he did not sell the drug, that assertion is belied by the fact that he sold the drug to an informant. Moreover, he admitted to bartering the drug in exchange for manual labor around his home, thereby distributing the drug. The amount of drugs manufactured and distributed was more than enough to justify the district court’s Guidelines calculation. Finally, while Wittingen’s personal circumstances are certainly lamentable, the circumstances are also (unfortunately) quite common in these types of cases. Accordingly, for the reasons more fully explained below, we affirm.