United States v. Derrick D. Jones

65 F.3d 172, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 30590, 1995 WL 496760
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedAugust 22, 1995
Docket95-1790
StatusUnpublished

This text of 65 F.3d 172 (United States v. Derrick D. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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. Derrick D. Jones, 65 F.3d 172, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 30590, 1995 WL 496760 (8th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

65 F.3d 172

NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Derrick D. JONES, Appellant.

No. 95-1790.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Aug. 9, 1995.
Filed: Aug. 22, 1995.

Before FAGG, LOKEN, and ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Derrick D. Jones appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after Jones pleaded guilty to drug and firearm charges. Jones contends the district court violated his constitutional right to due process in counting as a prior sentence for criminal history purposes a state felony conviction and sentence imposed after he committed the federal drug and firearm offenses. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 4A1.1(a). We reject Jones's due process claim. See United States v. Merino, 44 F.3d 749, 755 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1802 (1995). The plain language of U.S.S.G. Sec. 4A1.2(a)(1) defining a prior sentence and the supporting explanatory commentary make clear that Jones's unrelated state court sentence was properly counted. United States v. Lara, 975 F.2d 1120, 1129 (5th Cir.1992); United States v. Smith, 900 F.2d 1442, 1446-48 (10th Cir.1990).

We reject Jones's perfunctory assertion that the district court's criminal history computation violated Jones's right to a presumption of innocence. Indeed, Jones's state offense was not counted until after he was convicted and sentenced in state court and his guilt was adjudicated in federal court.

Accordingly, we affirm Jones's sentence.

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

Related

United States v. Robert L. Smith
900 F.2d 1442 (Tenth Circuit, 1990)
United States v. Yolanda C. Lara
975 F.2d 1120 (Fifth Circuit, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 F.3d 172, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 30590, 1995 WL 496760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-derrick-d-jones-ca8-1995.