United States v. Nichols

Opinion

FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 23, 2019 _________________________________ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 18-3179 v. (D.C. Nos. 2:16-CV-02381-KHV & 2:03-CR-20149-KHV-DJW-1) SAMMY NICHOLS, (D. Kan.)

Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________

Before MATHESON, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges. _________________________________

This matter is before us on the “Motion of the United States for Summary

Affirmance” (“Motion”). The United States moves for summary affirmance of the district

court’s judgment based on this court’s recent published decision in United States v.

Pullen, 913 F.3d 1270 (10th Cir. 2019), en banc rev. denied April 15, 2019. Defendant-

Appellant does not dispute that United States v. Greer, 881 F.3d 1241 (10th Cir. 2018)

and Pullen control the outcome of this appeal; Mr. Nichols does not contest summary

* After examining the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. affirmance of the district court’s judgment, but he reserves the right to appeal this matter

to the United States Supreme Court for further review.

In light of the foregoing, the abatement of this matter is LIFTED, and the Motion

is GRANTED. In light of this court’s decision in Pullen, the judgment of the district court

is AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court Per Curiam