USA v. Detrick Dotson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-11508 Affirmed] Judge: CDK, Judge: JLD, Judge: GJC. Mandate pull date is 08/10/2017 for Appellant Detrick Ivre Dotson; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellee USA [8476878-2]; denying motion to extend time to file appellee's brief filed by Appellee USA [8476878-3] [16-11508]

Case: 16-11508

Document: 00514081568

Page: 1

Date Filed: 07/20/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-11508
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
July 20, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
DETRICK IVRE DOTSON,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:16-CR-23-1
Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

Detrick Ivre Dotson pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a
firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) and was sentenced to forty-two
months of imprisonment. He appeals his sentence, arguing that, in light of
Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), the district court erred in
determining that his prior Texas conviction for aggravated robbery was a crime
of violence for purposes of the sentencing guidelines. After Dotson filed his

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
*

Case: 16-11508

Document: 00514081568

Page: 2

Date Filed: 07/20/2017

No. 16-11508
opening brief, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Beckles v. United States,
137 S. Ct. 886 (2017), in which the Court held that Johnson does not apply to
the sentencing guidelines.

See Beckles, 137 S. Ct. at 890. The Government

has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance in light of Beckles.
Summary affirmance is proper where, among other things, “the position of one
of the parties is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no
substantial question as to the outcome of the case.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v.
Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
The motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district
court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternative motion for an
extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.

2