UNITED STATES v. PALACIOS (2018)

Jose Palacios, Jr. appeals the sentence imposed at resentencing on remand for his conviction for possession with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana. In his first appeal, this court held that the district court plainly erred by denying Palacios the right to allocution before pronouncing his sentence; the court vacated his sentence and remanded the case for resentencing. On remand, Palacios argued that (1) his base offense level should be reduced by two levels to 32 under the retroactive Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines; (2) he should not receive a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 for possession of a firearm; and (3) he should receive a safety valve reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f). The district court reduced his offense level to 32 under Amendment 782, but ruled that he could not raise his other arguments challenging his sentence.

On appeal, Palacios has filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition of his appeal, conceding that his arguments challenging his sentence on remand were foreclosed by the mandate rule. See United States v. Griffith, 522 F.3d 607, 610 (5th Cir. 2008); United States v. Lee, 358 F.3d 315, 323 (5th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, because summary disposition is appropriate, Palacios’s unopposed motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.