United States v. Lambeth

186 F. App'x 443
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJune 21, 2006
Docket05-10185
StatusUnpublished

This text of 186 F. App'x 443 (United States v. Lambeth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. Lambeth, 186 F. App'x 443 (5th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Bobbie Ray Lambeth appeals the sentence he received after he pleaded guilty to mail fraud. The Government does not argue that Lambeth’s appeal waiver precludes his appeal; it has, therefore, waived any such argument. See United States v. Lang, 440 F.3d 212, 213 (5th Cir.2006).

Lambeth argues that his sentence must be vacated under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), because the district court’s application of the Guidelines to determine the loss amount and its increase in his offense level for his role in the offense resulted in a sentence that exceeded the sentence authorized by the facts which he admitted. Lambeth also argues that application of the remedial portion of Booker, whereby the district court increased his sentence based on facts not alleged in the indictment or admitted by him by a preponderance of the evidence, violated his due process rights. This court recently squarely rejected the arguments that Lambeth makes. See United States v. Johnson, 445 F.3d 793, 798 (5th Cir.2006) (citing United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 43,163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005)).

Accordingly, Lambeth’s sentence is AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

United States v. Mares
402 F.3d 511 (Fifth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Lang
440 F.3d 212 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Johnson
445 F.3d 793 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
186 F. App'x 443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-lambeth-ca5-2006.