6th Amendment jury trial challenge to sentencing procedure rejected

U.S. v. Caiba-Antele, 2012 WL 6062655 (12/7/12) (N.M.) (unpub'd) - The district court rejected a reentry plea agreement because it didn't reflect dropped state sex abuse charges brought against the defendant. The defendant then pleaded guilty without an agreement. At an evidentiary hearing, 2 detectives detailed the interviews they conducted with 3 children who alleged sexual abuse and rape over the course of several years. The detectives testified they found the children credible. The prosecutor testified the charges were dropped due to the risk of psychological harm to the victims and because one victim wanted to get on with her life. The district court found the detectives credible and found that the defendant probably committed the acts of sexual abuse and rape. The judge then calculated what the guideline range would be if the defendant had been convicted of the dropped charges: 46-57 months, instead of the actual range of 8-12 months. The judge imposed 51 months. 10th precedent required the panel to reject the 6th Amendment challenge. The 10th held the evidence upon which the court relied was sufficiently reliable. The detectives had observed the victims first-hand and those victims corroborated each other. This case was distinguishable from U.S. v. Fennell, 65 F.3d 812 (10th Cir. 1995), where the probation officer just talked to the alleged assault victim over the phone and so couldn't view the witness's demeanor.