CA1: proving propr convictions with computerized docket entries

US v. McKenzie, No. 07-1834 (8/21/08) holds that it was okay to use computerized docket (but attested an authenticated) entries, which had the effect of rendering the defendant ineligible for safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f).  It then goes on to hold that “attested copies of electronic docket entries may be a sufficient proffer of prior conviction for sentencing proceedings before a district court”

Strangely, the initial prior convictions were for shoplifting and there the First held that “...the potential for physical confrontation made it impossible to conclude that shoplifting was ‘similar to’ certain offenses excluded from CHC calculations under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(c).”   The First sticks by this, case, United States v. Spaulding, 339 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2003), and therefore the shoplifting cases count.