USA v. Christopher Lessner
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [17-10245 Affirmed] Judge: TMR, Judge: ECP, Judge: JEG. Mandate issue date is 11/16/2017 for Appellant Christopher Lessner; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellee USA [8544036-2]; denying as unnecessary motion to extend time to file appellee's brief filed by Appellee USA [8544036-3] [17-10245]
Case: 17-10245
Document: 00514210372
Page: 1
Date Filed: 10/25/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-10245
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
October 25, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
CHRISTOPHER LESSNER,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:16-CR-229-1
Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Christopher Lessner pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a
firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district
court sentenced Lessner to 63 months of imprisonment and a three-year term
of supervised release. On appeal, Lessner argues that the district court plainly
erred under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments by imposing a sentence based on
factual findings that were not supported by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 17-10245
Document: 00514210372
Page: 2
Date Filed: 10/25/2017
No. 17-10245
He concedes that his argument is foreclosed under current circuit law, but he
raises the claim solely to preserve it for further review.
The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance
or, alternatively, for an extension of time to file a brief on the merits. Summary
affirmance is proper where, among other instances, “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). Because Lessner’s arguments are indeed
foreclosed by United States v. Tuma, 738 F.3d 681 (5th Cir. 2013), the
Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the
judgment is AFFIRMED. The alternative motion for an extension of time to
file a brief on the merits is DENIED as unnecessary.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?