United States v. James Mavromatis

769 F.3d 1194, 2014 WL 5454839
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedOctober 28, 2014
Docket14-30115
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 769 F.3d 1194 (United States v. James Mavromatis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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. James Mavromatis, 769 F.3d 1194, 2014 WL 5454839 (9th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

ORDER

Appellant James Mavromatis was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Following a bench trial, the district court entered a judgment of acquittal. Based on the same incident of possession, Mavromatis was charged in a new indictment and convicted of possessing a firearm after previously being committed to a mental institution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4).

*1195 Appellee, the government, has filed a “motion for remand based on confession of error,” because it agrees that Mavromatis’s conviction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause. The view of the Department of Justice is that Congress intended not to establish multiple offenses when the same incident of possession violates two subsections of § 922(g). The government further concedes that the Department of Justice took this position in a brief filed with the Supreme Court in 1992, when the Solicitor General agreed that § 922(g) states a single offense that supports a single conviction and sentence, rather than multiple offenses that may be charged separately. See United States v. Munoz-Romo, 989 F.2d 757, 758-759 (5th Cir.1993) (summarizing the Solicitor General’s position before the Supreme Court).

Accordingly, the government’s motion for remand is granted.

We remand this case to the district court with instructions to vacate the conviction and dismiss the indictment.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

REMANDED.

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

Related

United States v. Mack Harris
Ninth Circuit, 2022

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
769 F.3d 1194, 2014 WL 5454839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-james-mavromatis-ca9-2014.