United States v. Ronald Jackson, Jr.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
• Decided: December 16, 2020
• Docket: 19-4206
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 20a0698n.06

Case No. 19-4206

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Dec 16, 2020 DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED ) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR v. ) THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ) OHIO RONALD JACKSON, JR., ) Defendant-Appellant. ) )

BEFORE: CLAY, GILMAN, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges.

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Ronald Jackson, Jr. robbed a 7-Eleven at gunpoint. He was

caught the next day, and the federal government charged him with three crimes: robbery, using

and brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, and possessing a firearm and ammunition as

a felon. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951(a) (robbery), 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) (brandishing), 922(g)(1) (felon in

possession). Jackson pled guilty to all three crimes. He now appeals his conviction for the second

crime—brandishing a gun during a crime of violence. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).

Jackson argues for the first time on appeal that robbery does not count as a crime of

violence. See 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (defining robbery). But we have already held that it does. See

United States v. Gooch, 850 F.3d 285, 291–92 (6th Cir. 2017) (holding that robbery as defined by

18 U.S.C. § 1951 qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)); see also United States

v. Camp, 903 F.3d 594, 597 (6th Cir. 2018) (same). Thus, the district court did not err—much less Case No. 19-4206, United States v. Jackson

plainly err—in accepting Jackson’s plea and sentencing him based on the robbery constituting a

crime of violence. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b). And since Jackson does not challenge his

convictions or sentence on any other grounds, we affirm.

-2-