Court Opinion

ID: 9352222
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-05 17:00:34.961945+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:59:29.293086
License: Public Domain

Appellate Case: 21-1404     Document: 010110793339       Date Filed: 01/05/2023     Page: 1
                                                                                   FILED
                                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                          Tenth Circuit

                              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT                          January 5, 2023
                          _________________________________
                                                                          Christopher M. Wolpert
                                                                              Clerk of Court
  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

        Plaintiff - Appellee,
                                                              No. 21-1404
  v.                                                (D.C. No. 1:17-CR-00483-RBJ-3)
                                                               (D. Colo.)
  BRANDON L. LANKING,

        Defendant - Appellant.
                       _________________________________

                              ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
                          _________________________________

 Before PHILLIPS, MURPHY, and EID, Circuit Judges.
                    _________________________________

       After examining the briefs and appellate record, this court has determined

 unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this

 appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). Accordingly, we order

 the case submitted without oral argument.

       Brandon Lanking was found guilty, following a jury trial, of two counts of

 Hobbs Act robbery and one count of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery. A

 United States Probation Officer prepared a Presentence Investigation Report

 (“PSR”). The PSR concluded Lanking was a career offender for purposes of

       *
          This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines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.
Appellate Case: 21-1404   Document: 010110793339       Date Filed: 01/05/2023      Page: 2

 U.S.S.G. §§ 4B1.1 and 4B1.2. Based on the applicability of the career-offender

 enhancement, Lanking’s advisory sentencing guidelines range was 210 to 262

 months’ imprisonment. Without application of the career-offender enhancement,

 Lanking’s advisory sentencing guidelines range was 100 to 125 months’

 imprisonment. In the absence of any objection on Lanking’s part, the district

 court adopted the PSR, specifically including its application of the career-

 offender enhancement. Nevertheless, based on a consideration of the factors set

 out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the district court varied downward from the advisory

 sentencing range and imposed a sentence of 180 months in prison.

       For the first time on appeal, Lanking asserts the district court erred in

 calculating his advisory sentencing range by reference to the career-offender

 provisions set out in Part B of Chapter Four of the Sentencing Guidelines. He

 also argues he can satisfy the heavy burden of demonstrating this forfeited claim

 of error is plain for purposes of Fed. R. Crim. P. 52. Cf. United States v. Crowe,

 735 F.3d 1229, 1242 (10th Cir. 2013) (noting “[t]he plain error standard presents

 a heavy burden for an appellant”). In that regard, Lanking notes this court has

 definitively held that Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence for purposes

 of §§ 4B1.1 and 4B1.2. United States v. O’Connor, 874 F.3d 1147, 1158 (10th

 Cir. 2017). Furthermore, as a result of the error, Lanking’s advisory sentencing

 range more than doubled, from 100-125 months’ imprisonment to 210-262

 month’s imprisonment. The use of an incorrect advisory sentencing range “set

 the wrong framework for the sentencing proceedings.” Molina-Martinez v.

                                          2
Appellate Case: 21-1404   Document: 010110793339        Date Filed: 01/05/2023   Page: 3

 United States, 136 S. Ct. 1338, 1346 (2016). The resulting disparity affected

 Lanking’s substantial rights. Finally, the Supreme Court has made clear that

 guidelines errors that affect an appellant’s substantial rights ordinarily satisfy the

 fourth prong of plain-error review. Rosales-Mireles v. United States, 138 S. Ct.

 1897, 1911 (2018) (“In the ordinary case, as here, the failure to correct a plain

 Guidelines error that affects a defendant’s substantial rights will seriously affect

 the fairness, integrity, and public reputation of judicial proceedings.”). In its

 response brief, the government concedes the district court erred in applying the

 career-offender enhancement and concedes Lanking has satisfied his burden of

 demonstrating plain error.

       Upon review of the parties’ briefs and contentions, the appellate record,

 and the relevant authorities, this court concludes Lanking’s arguments and the

 government’s corresponding concession are well-taken. Accordingly, exercising

 jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a), this court

 REMANDS the matter to the district court to vacate Lanking’s sentence and to

 resentence him without reference to the career-offender provisions set out in

 Part B of Chapter Four of the Sentencing Guidelines. Furthermore, given the

                                           3
Appellate Case: 21-1404   Document: 010110793339      Date Filed: 01/05/2023   Page: 4

 government’s concession of error, this court’s mandate is ordered to issue

 forthwith.

                                          Entered for the Court

                                          Michael R. Murphy
                                          Circuit Judge

                                         4