United States v. Parmelee

144 F. App'x 255
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedAugust 8, 2005
Docket03-2774
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 144 F. App'x 255 (United States v. Parmelee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third 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. Parmelee, 144 F. App'x 255 (3d Cir. 2005).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

SCIRICA, Chief Judge.

Appellant Vernon Earl Parmelee was convicted by a jury of four counts of possession of child pornography using media that has traveled in interstate commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B). He does not challenge his conviction.

Parmelee was sentenced to 140 months imprisonment. In sentencing Parmelee, the District Court applied U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2G2.2, for persons convicted of possession of child pornography with the intent to traffic, rather than U.S.S.G. § 2G2.4, for simple possession of child pornography. This led to an increase in Parmelee’s sentencing range from 41-51 months to 135-168 months. Parmelee contends the District Court erred in employing a preponderance of the evidence standard, instead of a clear and convincing test, in determining whether he intended to traffic in child pornography. He further asserts that the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that he intended to distribute such material under either evidentiary standard. Finally, he maintains that the District Court impermissibly engaged in “double counting” by applying the increased base offense levels set forth in U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2 for persons who possess material involving the sexual exploitation of a minor with intent to traffic.

Parmelee also challenges his sentence under United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Having determined that the sentencing issues appellant raises are best determined by the District Court in the first instance, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance with Booker,

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

Related

United States v. Parmelee
262 F. App'x 416 (Third Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
144 F. App'x 255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-parmelee-ca3-2005.