## Facts

- Two Ninth Circuit cases were consolidated.
- In Watts, police found cocaine base and two loaded guns with ammunition in Watts’s home.
- A jury convicted Watts of possessing cocaine base with intent to distribute but acquitted him of using a firearm in relation to a drug offense.
- At sentencing, the district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Watts possessed the guns in connection with the drug offense and applied a firearm enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1).
- In Putra, authorities videotaped two cocaine sales involving Putra and a codefendant to a government informant.
- A jury convicted Putra of aiding and abetting a May 8 cocaine transaction but acquitted her of aiding and abetting a May 9 transaction.
- At sentencing, the district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Putra participated in the May 9 sale and aggregated drug quantities from both dates to calculate her Guidelines base offense level.
- In both cases, acquitted-count conduct was used to increase the defendants’ Sentencing Guidelines ranges based on preponderance findings.

## Issues

1. Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause or federal sentencing law bars a court from considering conduct underlying acquitted counts to enhance a sentence for the offense of conviction when the conduct is proved by a preponderance of the evidence.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court (per curiam) reversed the Ninth Circuit and remanded both cases.
- The Court held that a sentencing court may consider conduct underlying an acquitted charge if the conduct is proved by a preponderance of the evidence.
- The Court rejected the Ninth Circuit’s rule that acquitted facts may not be relied on “under any standard of proof.”
- The Court concluded that considering acquitted conduct for Guidelines calculations does not constitute punishment for the acquitted offense and does not violate Double Jeopardy when the sentence imposed stays within statutory limits.

## Legal Principles

- A jury acquittal does not bar a sentencing court from considering the underlying conduct under a lower standard of proof at sentencing.
- 18 U.S.C. § 3661 authorizes broad consideration of information about the defendant’s conduct at sentencing, including conduct related to acquitted charges.
- Sentencing enhancements based on relevant conduct are treated as part of the punishment for the offense of conviction, not a separate punishment for other alleged crimes.
- Acquitted conduct may be used to calculate a Guidelines range if proved by a preponderance of the evidence and the ultimate sentence remains within the statutory range authorized by the conviction.

## Conclusion

The Court held that federal sentencing courts may increase a defendant’s Guidelines range based on conduct underlying acquitted counts when the court finds that conduct proved by a preponderance of the evidence, and that this practice is consistent with § 3661, the Guidelines framework, and the Double Jeopardy Clause.


United States v. Watts, 519 U.S. 148 (1997)