Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Derrick Desean RICHARDSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-03-09
Citations: 678 F. App'x 783
Docket Number: No. 17-1002
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Derrick Desean RICHARDSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MATHESON, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 678
Pages: 783–784

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Derrick Desean RICHARDSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-1002
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Filed March 9, 2017
Robert Mark Russel, Jeremy S. Sibert, Office of the United States Attorney, District of Colorado, Denver, CO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Josh Lee, Robert W. Pepin, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Districts of Colorado and Wyoming, Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellant
Before MATHESON, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
Per Curiam
This matter is before us on the appel-lee's Motion for Summary Affirmance (the "Motion"). The United States moves for summary affirmance of the district court's order and separate judgment denying relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in light of the Supreme Court's decisiqn in Beckles v. United States, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 886, 197 L.Ed.2d 145, 2017 WL 855781 (March 6, 2017). The appellant Derrick Desean Richardson does not oppose the Motion.
Upon consideration, the Motion is granted. The' judgment of the district court is affirmed.
The mandate shall issue forthwith.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.