United States v. Banks

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Banks

131 F. App'x 983

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Banks. Read the opinion of the Court — 339 F.3d 267 →

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided May 20, 2005·No. 04-41111·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Eric' Banks pleaded guilty to possession of an unregistered firearm, in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5841, 5861(d), and 5871, and was sentenced to 75 months in prison and *984 three years of supervised release. Banks now appeals, challenging only his sentence.

Citing Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), Banks contends that the district court erred when it imposed a four-level Sentencing Guidelines increase under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) for having used and possessed a destructive device in connection with another offense. In light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Booker, — U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 756, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), this increase violated Banks’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury.

Where, as here, a defendant has preserved a Booker challenge in the district court, “we will ordinarily vacate the sentence and remand, unless we can say the error is harmless under Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.” United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520 n. 9 (5th Cir.2005). In this case, the Government has not met its burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that the Sixth Amendment violation at issue did not contribute to the sentence that Banks received. See United States v. Akpan, 407 F.3d 360, 376-77 (5th Cir.2005). Accordingly, we vacate Banks’s sentence and remand for resentencing. See id.

VACATED AND REMANDED RE-SENTENCING.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

PER CURIAM: *

Eric' Banks pleaded guilty to possession of an unregistered firearm, in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5841, 5861(d), and 5871, and was sentenced to 75 months in prison and *984 three years of supervised release. Banks now appeals, challenging only his sentence.

Citing Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), Banks contends that the district court erred when it imposed a four-level Sentencing Guidelines increase under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) for having used and possessed a destructive device in connection with another offense. In light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Booker, — U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 756, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), this increase violated Banks’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury.

Where, as here, a defendant has preserved a Booker challenge in the district court, “we will ordinarily vacate the sentence and remand, unless we can say the error is harmless under Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.” United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520 n. 9 (5th Cir.2005). In this case, the Government has not met its burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that the Sixth Amendment violation at issue did not contribute to the sentence that Banks received. See United States v. Akpan, 407 F.3d 360, 376-77 (5th Cir.2005). Accordingly, we vacate Banks’s sentence and remand for resentencing. See id.

VACATED AND REMANDED RE-SENTENCING.

*

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.

United States v. Banks, 131 F. App'x 983 (5th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

131 F. App'x 983 (United States v. Banks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related