UNITED STATES v. WARD (2020)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Brandon Nicholas WARD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 18-50329

Decided: February 12, 2020

Before: WARDLAW and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and BATAILLON,* District Judge.

Catherine Ahn, Elana Shavit Artson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, L. Ashley Aull, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ - Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee Brian A. Newman, Esquire, Attorney, Law Offices of Brian A. Newman, Hermosa Beach, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

MEMORANDUM **

Brandon Ward appeals the district court’s ruling to run his sentence on Count II consecutively under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A and in accordance with United States v. Gonzales, 520 U.S. 1, 10, 117 S.Ct. 1032, 137 L.Ed.2d 132 (1997). We agree that the district court has no discretion under § 1028A, and it must run the federal and state sentences consecutively. 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(b)(2). The Aggravated Identity Theft statute, 18 U.S.C.§ 1028A(b)(2), requires a consecutive sentence. The district court was correct in this regard.

Ward also argues that his appellate waiver is not applicable. We decline to dismiss the appeal on the basis of the appeal waiver and instead affirm on the merits. See United States v. Jacobo Castillo, 496 F.3d 947, 957 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law