United States v. Kassab
This text of 234 F. App'x 651 (United States v. Kassab) 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.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
The United States appeals from the sentence imposed on Bassam E. Kassab following his guilty-plea conviction for intentionally possessing and distributing pseudoephedrine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
We vacate and remand for resentencing pursuant to United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Booker requires remand where a district court did not believe it had discretion to sentence a defendant above the drug quantity to which he stipulated in his plea agreement. See id. at 267, 125 S.Ct. 738 (remanding Fanfan’s case for resen-tencing because, relying upon Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 961, 125 S.Ct. 21, 159 L.Ed.2d 851 (2004), the district court had erroneously imposed a sentence based solely upon the guilty verdict in the case); see also United States v. Ruiz-Alonso, 397 F.3d 815, 819 (9th Cir.2005) (remanding under similar circumstances).
Because we cannot say that the district judge would have imposed the same sentence in the absence of the mandatory [652]*652Guidelines, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing in a manner consistent with Booker. See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir.2005).
VACATE and REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
234 F. App'x 651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-kassab-ca9-2007.