# United States v. Anderson

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 27, 2008 · 526 F.3d 319

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553325

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donna ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** May 27, 2008
- **Citations:** 526 F.3d 319; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 11232; 2008 WL 2167229
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Batchelder
- **Judges:** Kennedy, Batchelder, Griffin
- **Cited by:** 77 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553325

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that application of § 2S1.1(a)(1) was appropriate where the drug quantity was unknown because the defendant was involved in the drug conspiracy, and the quantity of drugs for which the defendant was responsible could be approximated
- rejecting government’s argument that a district court’s misapplication of the Guidelines was harmless where the district court stated that it “ha[d] also determined that this would be the appropriate sentence and the sentence the Court would have imposed even had the Court det…
- affirming use of drug-conspiracy guideline to calculate base offense level because although there was “no evidence that [defendant] personally sold narcotics, her conduct did further the drug conspiracy to sell the narcotics and she was, therefore, responsible for the drug con…
- finding that the district court erred by not applying the “except as otherwise expressly provided” language in § lB1.5(c)

## Opinion text

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I write separately only to emphasize that we are not now holding, nor have we ever held, that an error in calculating the advisory Guidelines range can never be harmless. See United States v. Hazelwood, 398 F.3d 792, 801 (6th Cir.2005).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553325. Public record. Not legal advice.