United States v. Rolando Ramirez

507 F. App'x 353
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 10, 2013
Docket12-10133
StatusUnpublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 507 F. App'x 353 (United States v. Rolando Ramirez) 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. Rolando Ramirez, 507 F. App'x 353 (5th Cir. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Rolando Ramirez is appealing the 180-month sentence imposed following his conviction for possession of a firearm subsequent to a felony conviction.

Ramirez was sentenced under the provisions of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) because he had four prior convictions for burglary , of a habitation pursuant to Tex. Penal Code § 30.02(a)(3), which the district court determined were violent felo *354 nies under the ACCA’s residual clause. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1); U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4(a).

Ramirez’s sole argument on appeal is that the issue of whether his prior convictions were violent felonies under the ACCA was foreclosed by United States v. Constante, 544 F.3d 584 (5th Cir.2008). In Constante, we did not address whether burglary under § 30.02(a)(3) was a violent felony under the ACCA’s residual clause. Thus, the issue was not foreclosed by Constante. See, e.g., Matter of Swift, 129 F.3d 792, 796 n. 18 (5th Cir.1997) (stating that we are not bound by a previous decision if that decision did not consider an issue raised in the subsequent case).

In light of the foregoing, Ramirez’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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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. Bennie D. Emeary, Jr.
794 F.3d 526 (Fifth Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Charles St. Clair, VI
608 F. App'x 192 (Fifth Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Emeary
773 F.3d 619 (Fifth Circuit, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
507 F. App'x 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rolando-ramirez-ca5-2013.