United States v. Anthony Daniels

714 F. App'x 413
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 7, 2018
Docket16-10232 Summary Calendar
StatusUnpublished

This text of 714 F. App'x 413 (United States v. Anthony Daniels) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Anthony Daniels, 714 F. App'x 413 (5th Cir. 2018).

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM: *

The Court grants the petition for panel rehearing, withdraws its previous opinion in this matter, United States v. Daniels, 689 Fed.Appx. 376 (5th Cir. 2017), and substitutes the following opinion.

Anthony Verdean Daniels appeals his 224-month sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), for possession of a firearm by a felon and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. His appeal rests on the assertion that Texas Penal Code § 30.02 is not divisible under Mathis v. United States, — U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 2243, 195 L.Ed.2d 604 (2016). After his brief was filed, we held that § 30.02 is divisible under Mathis. United States v. Uribe, 838 F.3d 667, 669-71 (5th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1359, 197 L.Ed.2d 542 (2017).

Relying on Uribe, our original opinion on this appeal affirmed the district court’s judgment. Subsequently, on February 20, 2018, this Court, sitting en banc, expressly overruled the holding in Uribe. United States v. Herrold, 883 F.3d 517, No. 14-11317, 2018 WL 948373 (5th Cir. Feb. 20, 2018). More specifically, we held that the Texas burglary statute was indivisible and that it was broader than generic burglary. Id. 883 F.3d at 541-42, 2018 WL 948373 at *18. Thus, the prior conviction under the Texas burglary statute did not qualify as a violent felony. Id. Because Daniels’s prior conviction was under the same Texas burglary statute, we VACATE his sentence and REMAND for resentencing consistent with the holding in Herrold.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R, 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mathis v. United States
579 U.S. 500 (Supreme Court, 2016)
United States v. Felix Uribe
838 F.3d 667 (Fifth Circuit, 2016)
United States v. Michael Herrold
883 F.3d 517 (Fifth Circuit, 2018)
United States v. Daniels
689 F. App'x 376 (Fifth Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
714 F. App'x 413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-anthony-daniels-ca5-2018.