714 F. App'x 419
5th Cir.2018Background
- Morton pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2) and received a 57-month sentence.
- The district court applied a base offense level of 20 under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A) because Morton committed the offense after a felony conviction for a crime of violence.
- Morton’s prior record included a two-year sentence for attempting to take a weapon from a police officer and a related four-year sentence for being a felon in possession; those prior sentences were treated as a “single sentence” for criminal-history calculation under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(2).
- Because the grouped sentences produced criminal-history points only for the longest sentence, Morton argued the two-year sentence did not support the § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A) enhancement.
- Morton did not raise this objection in district court; on appeal he sought relief under plain-error review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a grouped prior conviction that received no criminal-history points under § 4A1.1 can still count as a predicate for § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A) | Morton: the two-year grouped sentence, which received no § 4A1.1 points, cannot trigger the § 2K2.1 base-level-20 enhancement | Government: a grouped prior sentence may serve as a predicate if it would independently have received criminal-history points; amendment commentary supports using such convictions as predicates | Court: Morton failed to show clear or obvious error; affirmed the sentence under plain-error review |
| Standard of review given Morton’s failure to object in district court | Morton: requests relief despite not preserving the issue below | Government: plain-error review applies and requires showing clear or obvious error affecting substantial rights | Court: applied plain-error standard and found no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (establishes procedural/substantive review framework for post-Booker sentencing)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (plain-error standard for forfeited claims)
- United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750 (5th Cir.) (standard for reviewing preserved sentencing objections)
- United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751 (5th Cir.) (de novo review of Guidelines application; clear-error for facts)
- United States v. Broussard, 669 F.3d 537 (5th Cir.) (plain-error review where defendant failed to object below)
- United States v. Evans, 587 F.3d 667 (5th Cir.) (requiring clear and obvious error to obtain relief on plain-error review)