United States v. Wood

140 F. App'x 629
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided August 5, 2005·No. No. 04-3149·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The district court violated the Sixth Amendment by applying a mandatory version of the federal sentencing guidelines, which required it to enhance the defendant’s sentence beyond the statutory maximum based on facts not admitted to by him nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 756, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). The defendant raised and preserved the error at the time of sentencing and we cannot say this constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Haidley, 400 F.3d 642 (8th Cir.2005). We therefore vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.

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

United States v. Wood, 140 F. App'x 629 (8th Cir. 2005).

140 F. App'x 629 (United States v. Wood) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)