Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Gonzalez-Huerta

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided April 8, 2005No. 04-2045Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

BRISCOE, J., joined by SEYMOUR, J., and HENRY, J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part, and joined by EBEL, J., as to Section IV, and LUCERO, J., as to Section V.

I agree with the majority that with the issuance of United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), we must now conclude the district court erred by applying the Sentencing Guidelines in a mandatory rather than advisory fashion at the time it sentenced Gonzalez-Huerta. Although I agree that this error was neither constitutional nor structural in nature, I disagree that the error does not warrant…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API