United States v. Bolton

112 F. App'x 372
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedNovember 16, 2004
Docket03-51336
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 112 F. App'x 372 (United States v. Bolton) 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. Bolton, 112 F. App'x 372 (5th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Roy Lee Bolton appeals his sentence following his guilty plea conviction for being a felon in possession of ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Bolton argues that the district court erred in determining that his offense level should be increased pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(c)(l) on the ground that he possessed the ammunition in connection with the commission of a robbery.

The Presentence Report (PSR) determined that Bolton committed the robbery at issue and consequently, under U.S.S.G. 2K2.1(c)(l), applied the cross reference to the applicable robbery guidelines to determine Bolton’s base offense level. Bolton objected; the district court overruled the objection and adopted the factual findings and recommendations of the PSR in its entirety in its Statement of Reasons. However, at Bolton’s sentencing hearing, in overruling Bolton’s objection to the sentence enhancement, the district court declined to determine whether Bolton had committed the robbery.

In the absence of a clear finding by the district court that the ammunition possessed by Bolton was connected to the commission of a robbery, there is no justification for the cross reference to U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1. See U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(c)(l).

We remand to the district court for such further findings as may be warranted and, if required, resentencing.

REMANDED. Jurisdiction is not retained.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

United States v. Wayne Handy
485 F. App'x 677 (Fifth Circuit, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 F. App'x 372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bolton-ca5-2004.