Conclusion For the reasons stated above, we vacate Canales’s sentence and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith. VACATED and REMANDED 1 . Canales was arrested for possession of cocaine while on parole for the 1974 federal heroin conviction — the same conviction for which he was later placed in a halfway house in 1990. 2 . As his second point of error, Canales makes a very cursory argument that because he was serving a portion of his sentence in a halfway house when he escaped, he was no longer in prison and thus the district court erred in adding two criminal history points for having committed the offense while he was imprisoned for a criminal justice sentence. See U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(e). This argument is meritless. See United. States v. Vickers, 891 F.2d 86 (5th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). We address this argument simply to clarify
holding that the enhancement provisions in guideline sections 4a 11d and e apply when the defendant escapes while serving a sentence at a residential center holding that when a court miscalculates the guideline range yet imposes a sentence that falls within a properly calculated guideline range the sentence enjoys a presumption of reasonableness holding that where the commentary to a guideline is at odds with another provision of the guidelines the guideline prevails holding that  3582c2 permits a district court only to substitute an amended guideline for the guideline used at the original sentencing and that a court lacks the authority to correct mistakes in a defendants original sentence holding that a sentencing court may warn a defendant of the possibility of a sentence enhancement