ORDER

ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH, District Judge.

This cause is before the Court sua sponte. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has issued its mandate, affirming in part and remanding in part. (Dkt. 120). This case was remanded for the Court to append to the PSI either a factual finding about the disputed statement or a statement that a finding was unnecessary because the Court did not consider the disputed statement in sentencing Defendant Aguinaga. If the Court determined that the factual information relied upon at Defendant's sentencing was not accurate, a resentencing would be necessary.

The Court has reviewed the PSI and the Sentencing Transcript. At the sentencing, the Court overruled Defendant's objection. The disputed statement, Paragraph 73 (Dkt. 94, p. 12), was included in the PSI as historical background only, for possible discussion during Defendant's counseling. The Court did not impose a more severe sentence or include an additional condition on the basis of the disputed statement. The Court therefore concludes that a finding as to the accuracy of the disputed statement is not necessary, as the Court did not consider the disputed statement in sentencing Defendant Aguinaga.

The Court directs that this Order be attached to the PSI, in accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(C). Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that a finding as to the accuracy of the disputed statement (Paragraph 73) is not necessary. This Order shall be appended to the PSI.

DONE and ORDERED.