“In Connection With Another Felony Offense” Enhancement Vacated for Lack of Findings

US v. Bolden: Bolden was a guest at somebody else's home when he took a bad trip. He had "become paranoid after using drugs, placed two women in a 'bear hug,' and began shooting at shadows on the walls inside the home's rear bedroom." Police responded to reports of shots fired and Bolden was arrested. During a protective sweep, officers recovered two guns and small amounts of marijuana and crack cocaine. Bolden pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. 

At sentencing, he argued against a four-level enhancement for possession in connection with another felony offense. The probation officer identified the other felony as kidnapping, based on Bolden's restraint of the two women. Bolden argued that the applicable kidnapping statute was a specific intent crime and his intoxication made it impossible to form the requisite intent. The district court agreed and held that there was no kidnapping. However, it went on to conclude that Bolden had committed "a number of crimes," including felony possession of cocaine, based on the drugs found after he was in custody. The district court did not make "an express finding that Bolen's possession of a firearm was 'connect[ed]' to the possession of cocaine." Bolden was sentenced to 102 months in prison, within the district court's calculated Guideline range.

The Fourth Circuit vacated Bolden's sentence. The court held that it was "unable to review “the district court's ruling because it "made no findings connecting Bolden's possession of a firearm to his possession of cocaine and gave no indication of its reasoning." Rejecting the Government's request to review for plain error (because Bolden didn't raise a second specific objection to the possession finding), the court noted that while the Guideline commentary allows for an inference of connection when the other felony offense is drug trafficking, the same is not applicable for simple possession. Therefore, the enhancement can only apply with an express finding that the firearm facilitated the other felony offense. While the court did vacate Bolden's sentence, it also made clear that it was not holding that the "enhancement is inapplicable as a matter of law" and remanded for further proceedings.