We have previously recognized that “[t]he likelihood of violence greatly increases when a firearm is present in connection with illegal drug possession.” United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir.2002); see also United States v. Ruiz, 412 F.3d 871, 881 (8th Cir.2005) (“[T]here is a close and well known connection between firearms and drugs. Firearms are tools of the drug trade due to the dangers inherent in that line of work.

The possession of a firearm contemporaneously with the commission of another felony offense requires a four level enhancement unless it is "clearly improbable" that the firearm was used in connection with that felony. United States v. Marks, 328 F.3d [1015,] 1017 [(8th Cir. 2003)], citing United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1018 (8th Cir. 2002). In response, Fuentes filed a sentencing Memorandum. He first noted that application note 14(A) to § 2K2.1 provides that the term "in connection with" in § 2K2.1(b)(6) requires a finding that "the firearm or ammunition facilitated, or had the potential of facilitating, another felony offense."

The potential for someone to get injured in the former situation versus the latter situation is so obvious discussion is unnecessary. See, e.g., United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2002) (“The likelihood of violence greatly increases when a firearm is present in connection with illegal drug possession.”); United States v. Newell, 596 F.3d 876, 880 (8th Cir. 2010) (same); United States v. Claxton, 276 F.3d 420, 423 (8th Cir. 2002) (“There is a close and well-known connection between firearms and drugs. . . . Firearms are known tools of the trade of narcotics dealing because of the dangers inherent in that line of work.”)

Consistent with our case law, the district court found that firearm possession by Harding can be considered part of drug trafficking because firearms are tools of the drug trade. United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2002) (citation omitted) ("Firearms are tools of the drug trade providing protection and intimidation."). McVay's statements and testimony about one of his drug supplier's gun possession falls within the scope of jointly undertaken criminal activity, furthers that criminal activity, and can reasonably be foreseen as connected with that criminal activity.

As relevant here, § 3D1.2(c) provides for grouping "[w]hen one of the counts embodies conduct that is treated as a specific offense characteristic in . . . the guideline applicable to another of the counts." Because "[f]irearms are the tools of the drug trade providing protection and intimidation," United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2002), Jefferson's drug counts and his felon-in-possession count each "include[] conduct that is treated [by the sentencing guidelines] as specific offense characteristics in the other offense," Bell, 477 F.3d at 614; see also U.S.S.G. §§ 3D1.2(c); 2D1.1(b)(1); 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). This does not change when the defendant has also been convicted under § 924(c) for possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.

This court again noted that drug trafficking is often accompanied by dangerous weapons. Id., citing United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2002) ("Firearms are the tools of the drug trade providing protection and intimidation."). See also United States v. Claxton, 276 F.3d 420, 423 (8th Cir. 2002) ("There is a close and well-known connection between firearms and drugs. . . . Firearms are known tools of the trade of narcotics dealing because of the dangers inherent in that line of work.") (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).

This application note was added in 2006. Prior to that time, the guidelines were silent on the definition of "in connection with," and our case law routinely upheld the adjustment when weapons and drugs were in the same vicinity, regardless of whether the underlying drug offense was for possession or trafficking, e.g., United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1018-19 (8th Cir. 2002). However, with the addition of Application Note 14, the Sentencing Commission decided to make a distinction between the factual circumstances of when the other felony was a drug trafficking offense, or alternatively, a simple drug possession offense. If the felony is for drug trafficking, Application Note 14(B) mandates application of the adjustment if guns and drugs are in the same location. U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6) cmt. n. 14(B).

Prior to that time, the guidelines were silent on the definition of "in connection with," and our case law routinely upheld the adjustment when weapons and drugs were in the same vicinity, regardless of whether the underlying drug offense was for possession or trafficking. E.g., United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1018-19 (8th Cir. 2002). However, with the addition of Application Note 14, the Sentencing Commission decided to make a distinction between the factual circumstances of when the other felony was a drug trafficking offense, or alternatively, a simple drug possession offense. If the felony is for drug trafficking, Application Note 14(B) mandates application of the adjustment if guns and drugs are in the same location. U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6) cmt. n. 14(B).

The district court apparently relied on this mandatory rule, as would have been reasonable in light of such cases as United States v. Agee, 333 F.3d 864, 866 (8th Cir. 2003) ("The enhancement must be imposed unless it is clearly improbable that [the defendant] possessed the firearm in connection with another felony offense," and saying in the same paragraph, "Regardless of whether those activities were manufacturing or simple possession or consumption, the enhancement was proper."), and United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1018 (8th Cir. 2002) (enhancement required where gun found in proximity to personal-use amount of marijuana and paraphernalia associated with drug trafficking). However, in Fuentes Torres, we held that where the other felony is simple possession of drugs, the district court should apply the enhancement only if it finds the guns "facilitated" or "had the potential of facilitating" the possession offense.

Firearms serve as the 'tools of the drug trade' by 'providing protection and intimidation,' therefore firearms and drug offenses are often related and "result in reciprocal offense characteristic enhancements." Id. at 615 ( quoting United States v. Linson, 276 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2002)). The testimony established that the .22 caliber pistol was well within the reach of a person lying in the bed and drug paraphernalia was scattered all over the bed at the time the gun was seized.