United States v. Alexander Milien-Fong
This text of United States v. Alexander Milien-Fong (United States v. Alexander Milien-Fong) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED ________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT July 29, 2005 No. 04-16605 THOMAS K. KAHN Non-Argument Calendar CLERK ________________________
D.C. Docket No. 04-20538-CR-PAS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALEXANDER MILIEN-FONG,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _________________________
(July 29, 2005)
Before BLACK, CARNES and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: Alexander Milien-Fong appeals his 37-month concurrent sentences for
conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute heroin, imposed because he
violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 841(a) and (b)(1)(A)(i) and 846. He contends that the
district court erred in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct.
738, 160 L.Ed.2d 261 (2005), by sentencing him under a mandatory Guidelines
system.
As the government correctly concedes, there was Booker error, it was
preserved, and the government cannot show that the error was harmless.
Accordingly, Milien-Fong’s sentence is due to be vacated and the case remanded
for the limited purpose of re-sentencing in light of the Booker decision.
SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Alexander Milien-Fong, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-alexander-milien-fong-ca11-2005.