Case ID: f-appx_363/html/0477-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Thomas Jackson ROGERS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-50504.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 11, 2010.
    
    Filed Jan. 25, 2010.
    John R. Kraemer, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Frederick Carroll, Law Offices of Frederick M. Carroll, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Thomas Jackson Rogers appeals from the two concurrent 188-month sentences imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d), and being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rogers contends that the district court erred by determining that he was a career offender because his two prior felony convictions were related under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(2) (2005), and therefore should have been counted as a single predicate offense. Even assuming that the “clear and convincing” evidence standard applied, see United States v. Jordan, 256 F.3d 922, 927-28 (9th Cir.2001), the record contained sufficient evidence that the offenses were unrelated because they were committed on different dates, involved different victims, and were prosecuted by different sovereigns in different proceedings. See § 4A1.2(a)(2) & cmt. n.3 (2005); see also United States v. Asberry, 394 F.3d 712, 719-20 (9th Cir.2005); United States v. Chapnick, 963 F.2d 224, 226-29 (9th Cir. 1992), superseded on other grounds as stated in United States v. Gallegos-Gonzalez, 3 F.3d 325, 327-28 (9th Cir.1993).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.