United States v. Tickles

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Tickles

691 F.3d 592, 485 F. App'x 735, 2012 WL 3324280

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided August 14, 2012·No. Nos. 10-30852, 10-31085·Published

Opinion

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and STEWART and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

After our opinion was issued in these consolidated cases, the Supreme Court decided Dorsey v. United States, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2321, 183 L.Ed.2d 250 (2012). Dorsey held, contrary to our opinion, that the more lenient penalties of the Fair Sentencing Act (“Act”) apply to offenders who committed an offense before the Act was passed, but were sentenced after the Act was enacted. We therefore VACATE and REMAND these cases for resentencing consistent with the Court’s holding in Dorsey.

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

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and STEWART and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

After our opinion was issued in these consolidated cases, the Supreme Court decided Dorsey v. United States, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2321, 183 L.Ed.2d 250 (2012). Dorsey held, contrary to our opinion, that the more lenient penalties of the Fair Sentencing Act (“Act”) apply to offenders who committed an offense before the Act was passed, but were sentenced after the Act was enacted. We therefore VACATE and REMAND these cases for resentencing consistent with the Court’s holding in Dorsey.

United States v. Tickles, 691 F.3d 592, 485 F. App'x 735, 2012 WL 3324280 (5th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

691 F.3d 592 (United States v. Tickles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related