United States v. Rosales

111 F. App'x 755
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 29, 2004
Docket04-40486
StatusUnpublished

This text of 111 F. App'x 755 (United States v. Rosales) 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. Rosales, 111 F. App'x 755 (5th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Defendant-Appellant Vincent Rosales appeals the sentence imposed by the district court following his guilty-plea conviction for aiding and abetting the possession of a stolen firearm. 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 922®, 924(a)(2). Rosales argues that the district court erred in increasing his offense level by four levels under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) for possessing a firearm in connection with the felony offense of burglary, arguing that the stolen firearm was not used “in connection with” the burglary but, rather, was the “object” of the burglary. Rosales misses the mark. First, the guideline in question applies disjunctively to use or possession; and Rosales indisputably possessed the firearm in question during the burglary, from the time it was stolen for the remainder of the burglary. See United States v. Luna, 165 F.3d 316, 323-24 (5th Cir.1999). Second, the district court did not clearly err in determining that Rosales possessed a firearm “in connection with” the burglary offense. See United States v. Armstead, 114 F.3d 504, 512 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Condren, 18 F.3d 1190, 1193, 1199-1200 (5th Cir.1994); see also United States v. Luna, 165 F.3d at 322-24. The sentence imposed by the district court 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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. Condren
18 F.3d 1190 (Fifth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Armstead
114 F.3d 504 (Fifth Circuit, 1997)
United States v. Norberto B. Luna
165 F.3d 316 (Fifth Circuit, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
111 F. App'x 755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rosales-ca5-2004.