When a defendant disputes that he has committed a Cross Reference crime, does Rule 32(i)(3)(B) require the district court to make specific findings about the elements of the Cross Reference crime — rather than summarily adopt the presentence report — in order to properly apply the Cross Reference provision at sentencing?

QUESTION PRESENTED The United States Sentencing Guidelines, in a provision titled “Cross Reference,” U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(c)(1), say that, if a defendant charged with unlawful possession of a firearm “used or possessed any firearm .. . cited in the offense of conviction in connection with the commission .. . of another offense,” then the base offense level for that other offense should apply. And Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(B) provides that the district court “must — for any disputed portion of the presentence report or other controverted matter — rule on the dispute.” The important question of federal criminal procedure that has not been resolved by this Court is: When a defendant disputes that he has committed a Cross Reference crime, does Rule 32(i)(3)(B) require the district court to make specific findings about the elements of the Cross Reference crime — rather than summarily adopt the presentence report — in order to properly apply the Cross Reference provision at sentencing? ii