United States v. Helton

161 F. App'x 377

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS January 4, 2006 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk

No. 04-40225

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JAMES HELTON, also known as Defendant #6,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before DAVIS, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

In our previous opinion in this case, we affirmed Defendant-

Appellant Helton’s conviction and sentence. See United States v.

Helton, No. 04-40225, 115 Fed. Appx. 687 (5th Cir. 2004) (per

curiam) (unpublished). Following our judgment, Helton filed a

petition for certiorari. The Supreme Court granted Helton’s

petition for certiorari, vacated our judgment, and remanded the

* 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

-1- case to this court for further consideration in light of United

States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). We now reconsider the

matter in light of Booker and decide to reinstate our previous

judgment affirming Helton’s conviction and sentence.

Helton raised a Booker-related challenge to his sentence for

the first time on direct appeal. Because Helton never raised a

Booker objection in trial court, however, Appellant’s claim would

fail under the plain-error test discussed in United States v.

Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520-22 (5th Cir. 2005). There is no

indication that the district court, if given the opportunity to

treat the guidelines as advisory only, would have imposed a lesser

sentence.

For the reasons stated above, our prior disposition remains in

effect, and we REINSTATE OUR EARLIER JUDGMENT affirming Helton’s

conviction and sentence.

-2-