United States v. Ard

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: July 15, 2026
• Docket: 25-30634
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 25-30634 Document: 50-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/15/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 25-30634 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ July 15, 2026 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Evan Aaron Ard,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:23-CR-187-1 ______________________________

Before Smith, Southwick, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Evan Ard appeals the sentence imposed for his convictions of conspir- acy to commit Hobbs Act robbery and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence. For the first time on appeal, he challenges the application of the bodily-injury adjustment that increases his base offense level by two. The district court erred by finding that a victim sustained bodily injury

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-30634 Document: 50-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/15/2026

No. 25-30634

during the robbery. See U.S.S.G. § 2B1.3(b)(3)(A). In light of our decision in the appeal of one of Ard’s codefendants, United States v. Brumfield, No. 24-30388, 2025 WL 1566594, at *3 (5th Cir. June 3, 2025) (per curiam) (unpublished), the error is clear or obvious. See United States v. Sanches, 86 F.4th 680, 686 (5th Cir. 2023). Even so, we cannot say that the error affected Ard’s substantial rights. See United States v. Hott, 866 F.3d 618, 621 (5th Cir. 2017). The district court reasoned that a 63-month sentence was sufficient in light of Ard’s personal characteristics and other relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and indicated in the statement of reasons that it would have imposed an identical sentence in the event that the guidelines calculations were incorrect. As a result, the record is not silent as to what sentence the district court would have imposed but for the guidelines error. See United States v. Blanco, 27 F.4th 380, 381 (5th Cir. 2022). AFFIRMED.