United States v. Milien-Fong

140 F. App'x 918
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedJuly 29, 2005
DocketNo. 04-16605; D.C. Docket No. 04-20538-CR-PAS
StatusPublished

This text of 140 F. App'x 918 (United States v. Milien-Fong) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh 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. Milien-Fong, 140 F. App'x 918 (11th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Alexander Milien-Fong appeals his 37-month concurrent sentences for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute heroin, imposed because he violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 841(a) and (b)(1)(A)® and 846. He contends that the district court erred in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. —, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 261 (2005), by sentencing him under a mandatory Guidelines system.

As the government correctly concedes, there was Booker error, it was preserved, and the government cannot show that the error was harmless. Accordingly, Milien-Fong’s sentence is due to be vacated and the case remanded for the limited purpose of re-sentencing in light of the Booker decision.

SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED.

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

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
Vizcaino v. Escalon Premier Brands
543 U.S. 946 (Supreme Court, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 F. App'x 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-milien-fong-ca11-2005.