United States v. McLennan

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: November 6, 2025
• Docket: 24-10871
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 24-10871 Document: 63-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/06/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

No. 24-10871 FILED November 6, 2025 Summary Calendar ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Brad McLennan,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:24-CR-95-1 ______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Engelhardt, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Brad McLennan was sentenced to 80 months of imprisonment after pleading guilty to possession of a firearm after a felony conviction, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He contends that the district court erred by classifying his prior Texas conviction for robbery causing bodily injury as a crime of violence under the Sentencing Guidelines. The Government has _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 24-10871 Document: 63-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/06/2025

No. 24-10871

moved without opposition for summary affirmance or, alternatively, for an extension of time to file a brief. Summary disposition is proper when “the position of one of the parties is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of the case.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). We recently held in United States v. Wickware, 143 F.4th 670, 674-75 (5th Cir. 2025), that Texas robbery still constitutes a crime of violence under the Sentencing Guidelines. Because Wickware is clearly dispositive, we affirm the district court’s judgment without further briefing. See United States v. Bailey, 924 F.3d 1289, 1290 (5th Cir. 2019). The motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED as moot, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.