United States v. Vmon

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Vmon

140 F. App'x 922

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedAugust 4, 2005

DocketNo. 03-11173; D.C. Docket No. 00-00060-CR-FTM-29-DNF

StatusPublished

This text of 140 F. App'x 922 (United States v. Vmon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh 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. Vmon, 140 F. App'x 922 (11th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Znop Byx Vmon was convicted of knowingly making false statements to a licensed firearms dealer in connection with attempts to purchase firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) and sentenced to 70 months imprisonment. We affirmed his conviction on direct appeal, in which Vmon raised a constitutional challenge to his convictions under Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), for the first time in his reply brief. Vmon petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari, which the Court granted, vacating and remanding the case to us for reconsideration in light of United States v. Booker, — U.S. —, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).

This court does not consider issues raised for the first time in a reply brief, and this rule applies to Booker challenges. See United States v. Day, 405 F.3d 1293, 1294 n. 1 (11th Cir.2005); United States v. Dockery, 401 F.3d 1261, 2005 WL 487735 (11th Cir.2005); United States v. Levy, 2005 WL 1620719 (11th Cir. July 12, 2005). Accordingly, we AFFIRM.

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

PER CURIAM.

Znop Byx Vmon was convicted of knowingly making false statements to a licensed firearms dealer in connection with attempts to purchase firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) and sentenced to 70 months imprisonment. We affirmed his conviction on direct appeal, in which Vmon raised a constitutional challenge to his convictions under Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), for the first time in his reply brief. Vmon petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari, which the Court granted, vacating and remanding the case to us for reconsideration in light of United States v. Booker, — U.S. —, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).

This court does not consider issues raised for the first time in a reply brief, and this rule applies to Booker challenges. See United States v. Day, 405 F.3d 1293, 1294 n. 1 (11th Cir.2005); United States v. Dockery, 401 F.3d 1261, 2005 WL 487735 (11th Cir.2005); United States v. Levy, 2005 WL 1620719 (11th Cir. July 12, 2005). Accordingly, we AFFIRM.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 F. App'x 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-vmon-ca11-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack