Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
United State of America v. James Andrew Hitch
Date: 01-24-2023
Case Number: 22-5088
Judge: McKeague
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on appeal from the Eastern District of Kentucky (Fayette County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Lexington
Defendant's Attorney: John F. Clark
Description:
Lexington, Kentucky criminal defense lawyer represented Defendant charged with felony possession of a stolen firearm.
Following a guilty plea, James Hitch was sentenced to fifty-one months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He now appeals his
sentence, alleging that the district court erred by applying a stolen-firearm enhancement under
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A) and an enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with
another felony offense under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B).
Hitch and his co-defendant stole six firearms from Whitetail Heaven Outfitters Elite
Outdoors Superstore, a federally licensed firearms dealer. Hitch was indicted and ultimately
pleaded guilty to theft of multiple firearms from a federally licensed firearms dealer in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 922(u), and illegally possessing firearms after having previously been convicted
of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
The parties entered a plea agreement, in which they jointly recommended the application
of two enhancements: first, an enhancement under § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A) for the number of firearms
involved; and second, an enhancement pursuant to § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) because Hitch possessed a
firearm in connection with another felony offense. The parties made no agreement about the
application of § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A)'s stolen-firearm enhancement and preserved their rights to
present arguments in favor or against its application.
The probation department prepared a Presentence Report (PSR). Pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 3D1.2(d), the PSR recommended grouping both counts together. Because the possession count
had the higher offense level, it set the base offense level at fourteen pursuant to
§ 2K2.1(a)(6)(A).
The PSR also recommended applying both the § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A) and § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B)
enhancements that the parties agreed to in their plea agreement. Further, the PSR recommended
application of the stolen-firearm enhancement, § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A).
Hitch objected to application of the stolen-firearm enhancement, arguing that its
application resulted in double counting. The district court overruled his objection.
The district court adopted the PSR's findings and calculations. Hitch's Guidelines range
was forty-six to fifty-seven months of imprisonment, and he requested a sentence at or near the
bottom of the range. The district court sentenced Hitch to fifty-one months of imprisonment and
three years of supervised release. He timely appealed.
fifty-one months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He now appeals his
sentence, alleging that the district court erred by applying a stolen-firearm enhancement under
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A) and an enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with
another felony offense under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). B
Following a guilty plea, James Hitch was sentenced to fifty-one months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He now appeals his
sentence, alleging that the district court erred by applying a stolen-firearm enhancement under
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A) and an enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with
another felony offense under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B).
Hitch and his co-defendant stole six firearms from Whitetail Heaven Outfitters Elite
Outdoors Superstore, a federally licensed firearms dealer. Hitch was indicted and ultimately
pleaded guilty to theft of multiple firearms from a federally licensed firearms dealer in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 922(u), and illegally possessing firearms after having previously been convicted
of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
The parties entered a plea agreement, in which they jointly recommended the application
of two enhancements: first, an enhancement under § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A) for the number of firearms
involved; and second, an enhancement pursuant to § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) because Hitch possessed a
firearm in connection with another felony offense. The parties made no agreement about the
application of § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A)'s stolen-firearm enhancement and preserved their rights to
present arguments in favor or against its application.
The probation department prepared a Presentence Report (PSR). Pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 3D1.2(d), the PSR recommended grouping both counts together. Because the possession count
had the higher offense level, it set the base offense level at fourteen pursuant to
§ 2K2.1(a)(6)(A).
The PSR also recommended applying both the § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A) and § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B)
enhancements that the parties agreed to in their plea agreement. Further, the PSR recommended
application of the stolen-firearm enhancement, § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A).
Hitch objected to application of the stolen-firearm enhancement, arguing that its
application resulted in double counting. The district court overruled his objection.
The district court adopted the PSR's findings and calculations. Hitch's Guidelines range
was forty-six to fifty-seven months of imprisonment, and he requested a sentence at or near the
bottom of the range. The district court sentenced Hitch to fifty-one months of imprisonment and
three years of supervised release. He timely appealed.
fifty-one months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He now appeals his
sentence, alleging that the district court erred by applying a stolen-firearm enhancement under
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(4)(A) and an enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with
another felony offense under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). B
Outcome:
Affirmed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of United State of America v. James Andrew Hitch?
The outcome was: Affirmed.
Which court heard United State of America v. James Andrew Hitch?
This case was heard in United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on appeal from the Eastern District of Kentucky (Fayette County), KY. The presiding judge was McKeague.
Who were the attorneys in United State of America v. James Andrew Hitch?
Plaintiff's attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Lexington. Defendant's attorney: John F. Clark.
When was United State of America v. James Andrew Hitch decided?
This case was decided on January 24, 2023.