Court Opinion

ID: 9813988
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 23:28:32.610455+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:33:07.576652
License: Public Domain

RYAN, Circuit Judge, concurring.
I concur in the result reached in my brother’s opinion, and in most of the underlying analysis. I do think, however, that it is not necessary to address the issue whether our remand in Franks I was general or limited because, in either case, Franks forfeited his argument that the district court improperly applied a two-point enhancement for possession of a firearm by not raising it during the initial sentencing hearing or appeal. Although a general remand permits the district court to “entertain any issues it feels are relevant to the overall sentencing decision,” it “does not give the parties license to reassert issues that they should have raised during an earlier appeal.” United States v. McKinley, 227 F.3d 716, 718 (6th Cir. 2000).
That said, I concur in the judgment for affirmance.