Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Donovan Lemont BOOKMAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-09-07
Citations: 197 F. App'x 349
Docket Number: No. 05-11053
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Donovan Lemont BOOKMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 197
Pages: 349–350

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Donovan Lemont BOOKMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-11053
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 7, 2006.
Mark L. Nichols, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Nancy E. Larson, Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX,
Jeanette Mercado, Jason Douglas Hawkins, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Donovan Lemont Bookman appeals the 180-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). Bookman renews his argument that the district court's application of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), was error because the Government did not prove that his prior burglary-of-a-habitation convictions occurred on different occasions with appropriate documentation, citing Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13, 125 S.Ct. 1254, 161 L.Ed.2d 205 (2005). The Government concedes the error.
We agree that, because the record does not disclose that the sequence of Book-man's prior convictions was established by Shepard-appropriate material, the ACCA enhancement was error. See United States v. Fuller, 453 F.3d 274, 279-80 (5th Cir.2006). Accordingly, the district court's judgment is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED for resentencing. Because we remand for resentencing on the Shepard violation, we do not address the remainder of Bookman's arguments.
JUDGMENT VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.