United States v. Geronimo Sanchez, 675 F. App'x 433

Sanchez, a convicted felon, was arrested after officers responded to a crime in progress; ammunition was found in his apartment (box in hall closet and a single 9mm under the bed) and two 9mm cartridges were later found under the patrol car’s back seat after he exited. Sanchez admitted ownership of the ammunition from his pocket and said the closet ammunition belonged to his girlfriend’s children.
He was charged, tried by jury, and convicted on two counts of being a felon in possession of ammunition (both for possession on the same date); sentenced to 24 months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release on each count, served concurrently, plus $100 special assessment per count.
On appeal Sanchez raised, for the first time, a Double Jeopardy/ multiplicity claim arguing the indictment did not allege possession on separate occasions, so two convictions and sentences violated the Double Jeopardy Clause.
The government argued Sanchez waived the multiplicity challenge to the indictment by not raising it pretrial, and any challenge to sentences was reviewed for plain error; the court analyzed circuit precedent distinguishing simultaneous possession from separate occasions.
The court held Sanchez waived the pretrial challenge to multiplicity of convictions; as to sentencing, because the law was unsettled and the facts could permissibly support separate occasions (based in part on Sanchez’s own testimony), any error was not "plain." The panel affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether two convictions/sentences for possession of ammunition on same date violate Double Jeopardy (multiplicity)	Sanchez: Indictment did not allege separate occasions; convictions and separate sentences are multiplicitous	Government: Multiplicity challenge to indictment was waived; any sentencing claim reviewed for plain error and facts/law do not show plain double jeopardy error	Waived as to indictment; on plain-error review, no plain Double Jeopardy error — affirmed

United States v. Meza, 701 F.3d 411 (5th Cir. 2012) (simultaneous possession of firearm and ammunition treated as single offense for double jeopardy purposes)
United States v. Njoku, 737 F.3d 55 (5th Cir. 2013) (multiplicity challenges to indictment must be raised pretrial; sentencing claims may be reviewed for plain error)
Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009) (plain error standard and prerequisites for appellate correction)
United States v. Berry, 977 F.2d 915 (5th Cir. 1992) (Congress’s intent in § 922 is status-based; simultaneous possession is a single episode)
United States v. Ogba, 526 F.3d 214 (5th Cir. 2008) (special assessments imposed per count mean sentences are not truly concurrent for double jeopardy analysis)