The government presented no evidence to support the enhancement except the presentence investigation report (PSR) prepared by the probation office. The PSR indicates that Hampton hit the officer after he lost control of his vehicle. We cannot conclude from this evidence that Hampton intended to hit anyone, let alone a law enforcement officer. Moreover, we disagree with the district court that the enhancement should apply because the crash was a foreseeable consequence of the high-speed chase. Rather, the government must prove that 1) the defendant engaged in action akin to aggravated assault, and 2) the defendant had reason to believe the intended and actual victim was a law enforcement officer. USSG § 3A1.2(b)(1); accord United States v. Castillo, 924 F.2d 1227, 1236 (2d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). In this case, the meager evidence presented
holding that an enhancement under  3a12 cannot apply absent evidence that defendant knew or had reasonable cause to believe victim was a law enforcement officer holding that a police officer had probable cause to arrest an alleged shoplifter based upon the uncorroborated report of a single security guard and stating that when an officer has received information from some person  normally the putative victim or eye witness  who it seems reasonable to believe is telling the truth he has probable cause holding that absent warrant or exigent circumstances an officer had no authority to demand that the juvenile keep the door open to his residence or demand entry into it and thus the juvenile could not be convicted of resisting a law enforcement officer for trying to close door even if the officer had probable cause to believe that the juvenile was sheltering a runaway holding police officer had probable cause to believe defendant was operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol holding a warrantless arrest by a law officer is reasonable under the fourth amendment where there is probable cause to believe that a criminal offense has been or is being committed