USA v. Roy M. Belfast, Jr. - Court of Appeals - 11th Circuit

under § 3D1.4. Emmanuel’s final combined, adjusted offense level was 51.
Emmanuel objected to the PSI. In particular, he argued that the application
of the § 2A4.1 kidnapping guideline and the § 2A1.1 murder cross-reference was
unconstitutional and improper, because he had not been charged with or convicted
of either kidnapping or murder, and because none of the murders resulted from the
alleged torture. Emmanuel also argued that the district court could not
constitutionally sentence him for anything other than torture, because the CAT did
not specifically prohibit murder or kidnapping. Emmanuel suggested, instead, that
the aggravated assault guideline, § 2A2.2, better represented his convicted conduct.
Emmanuel also objected to the PSI’s use of ten offense groups, arguing that
Williams, Cole, and the two unnamed individuals did not merit their own offense
groups because there was insufficient evidence at trial that Emmanuel had killed
them.
The district court concluded that the kidnapping guideline, U.S.S.G. §
2A4.1, was the most appropriate of the potentially applicable guidelines, because
the offenses against all of the victims contained one or more elements of unlawful
restraint, abduction, or kidnapping. The district court observed that, whether or not
the victims’ initial detention was lawful, their continued detention plainly was not.
Next, in addressing Emmanuel’s objection to the application of § 2A4.1’s cross-
22