Case ID: f-appx_144/html/0684-01.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. Louis Charles MORGAN, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 05-50036.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 12, 2005.
    
    Decided Sept. 23, 2005.
    USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, Robert Gannon, Esq., USSA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Santa Ana, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Amy M. Karlin, DFPD, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office (Santa Ana), Santa Ana, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: REINHARDT, RYMER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Louis Charles Morgan appeals the 125-month sentence following his guilty-plea conviction for armed bank robbery and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a), (d) and 2(a), and brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Because appellant was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the sentencing court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc). See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 915-16 (9th Cir.2005) (extending Ameline’s limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional Booker error).

REMANDED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.