USA v. Dirk Antonious Engram, Jr.

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 15-12719
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cr-00380-ODE-LTW-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DIRK ANTONIOUS ENGRAM, JR.,
a.k.a. Dirk Antonious Engram,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(December 29, 2015)
Before HULL, WILLIAM PRYOR, and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 15-12719 Date Filed: 12/29/2015 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Dirk Engram appeals his two concurrent 28-month sentences imposed after
he pled guilty to two counts of extortion under color of official right. See 18
U.S.C. § 1951. On appeal, Mr. Engram contends that the district court erred by
applying a four-level enhancement, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2C1.1(b)(3), for an
offense involving a public official in a sensitive position because he was a first-
year prison guard in probationary status. After a thorough review of the record and
the parties’ briefs, we affirm.
I
We review Mr. Engram’s challenge to the district court’s application of the
Sentencing Guidelines de novo. See United States v. Louis, 559 F.3d 1220, 1224
(11th Cir. 2009).
The Sentencing Guidelines proved for a four-level enhancement if “the
offense involved an elected public official or any public official in a high-level
decision-making or sensitive position.” U.S.S.G. § 2C1.1(b)(3). A high-level
decision-making or sensitive position is “a position characterized by a direct
authority to make decisions for, or on behalf of, a government department, agency,
or other government entity, or by a substantial influence over the decision-making
process.” Id. § 2C.1, comment. (n.4(A)). Examples of “a public official who holds
Case: 15-12719 Date Filed: 12/29/2015 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

3
a sensitive position” include “a juror, a law enforcement officer, an election
official, and any other similarly situated individual.” Id. 1
A law enforcement officer holds a sensitive position, and a prison guard is a
law enforcement officer. Moreover, the district court noted, a prison guard—even
one on probationary status—has the authority and ability to directly and
significantly influence what comes in and out of a prison facility with the decisions
he makes. See United States v. Dodd, 770 F.3d 306, 312 (4th Cir. 2014) (holding
that a prison guard is a sensitive position under § 2C1.1(b)(3) because a person in
that position has the power to affect the integrity and workings of the judicial and
law enforcement system). The district court therefore did not err by applying the
four-level enhancement to Mr. Engram.
II
Mr. Engram’s sentence is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
1 The commentary was amended in 2004 to advance the notion that officers need not be in a
supervisory position to be considered “sensitive.” The amendment deleted the word
“supervisory” from the example “supervisory law enforcement officers” with the current “law
enforcement officers.” See U.S.S.G. Amend. 666 (effective Nov. 1, 2004).
Case: 15-12719 Date Filed: 12/29/2015 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --