resulted in a sentence outside of the correct range. Therefore, we vacate his sentence and remand this case to the district court for resentencing consistent with this opinion. SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING. * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. 1 . See U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(b) & cmt. 2; § 4A1.2(d)(2)(A) & cmt. 7. 2 . Theriot v. Parish of Jefferson, 185 F.3d 477, 491 n. 26 (5th Cir.1999) (explaining that we may not consider new evidence furnished for the first time on appeal or facts which were not before the district court at the time of the challenged ruling); United States v. Alford, 142 F.3d 825, 832 (5th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). 3 . See United States v. Hardeman, 933 F.2d
holding that district court may find facts to support both factors by adopting psr holding that arizona rule of civil procedure 52a requires the court to find only the ultimate facts not the evidentiary facts upon which the ultimate facts are based holding that defendant adopted facts found in the psr by not objecting holding that the district court may adopt facts contained in the psr without further inquiry if the facts have an adequate evidentiary basis and the defendant does not present rebuttal evidence holding that where defendant did not offer any rebuttal evidence to refute presentence report district court  was free to adopt facts in psi without further inquiry