United States v. Harrison Norris, Jr.

358 F. App'x 60
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Harrison Norris, Jr.. Read the opinion of the Court — 453 F. App'x 861
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided December 18, 2009·No. 08-10238·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

After having thoroughly reviewed the record and briefs, and having had the benefit of oral argument in this case, we are of the opinion that Appellant’s convictions should be affirmed. With regard to the general sentence imposed by the district court, however, we vacate and remand. A general sentence is per se illegal when it exceeds the maximum allowable sentence on one of the counts for which it is imposed. United States v. Woodard, 938 F.2d 1255, 1256 (11th Cir.1991). That the district court has the authority to impose the same sentence upon remand does not change our duty to vacate the general sentence and remand so that the court may impose a legal sentence. See Jones v. United States, 224 F.3d 1251, 1259 (11th Cir.2000).

AFFIRMED, in part, and VACATED AND REMANDED, in part.

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

United States v. Harrison Norris, Jr., 358 F. App'x 60 (11th Cir. 2009).

358 F. App'x 60 (United States v. Harrison Norris, Jr.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Kimmy Lee Woodard
938 F.2d 1255 (Eleventh Circuit, 1991)
Charles Larry Jones v. United States
224 F.3d 1251 (Eleventh Circuit, 2000)