Opinion ID: 582735
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Did the Trial Court Properly Impose an Enhanced Ten

Text: 59 Year Sentence for One of Appellant's Convictions Under 18 U.S.C. § 924 60 (c) as a Second or Subsequent 61 Conviction? 62 Appellant contends that the district court erred in imposing an enhanced ten-year sentence for appellant's gun conviction on Count IV pursuant to the second sentence of section 924(c)(1). We agree. 63 Our en banc decision in this case, handed down concurrently with this panel decision, holds that a defendant may not receive an enhanced sentence under section 924(c) for a second or subsequent conviction unless the offense underlying this conviction took place after a judgment of conviction had been entered on the prior offense. United States v. Abreu, 962 F.2d 1447 (10th Cir.1992) (en banc). Because that was not the case here, we concluded that Abreu ... [was] improperly given [an] enhanced sentence [ ] for [a] sentence or subsequent conviction [ ] under section 924(c). Id. We therefore reversed appellant's enhanced sentence of ten years under Count IV and remanded for resentencing. On resentencing, the court should impose only a five-year sentence on Count IV as is provided in the first sentence of section 924(c)(1). 64