Court Opinion

ID: 9895069
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-04 00:00:33.481823+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:54.815952
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-20027         Document: 00516955990             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/03/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                       No. 23-20027
                                                                                FILED
                                                                         November 3, 2023
                                     Summary Calendar
                                     ____________                          Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                             versus

   Rafael Romero Segura,

                                                Defendant—Appellee.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Southern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 4:21-CR-15-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Smith, Ho, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The government appeals the imposition of concurrent sentences on
   Rafael Segura’s underlying conviction of discharging a firearm during and in
   relation to a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii),
   and another federal sentence imposed in a different case for illegal reentry.
   The government asserts that consecutive sentences are statutorily mandated

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-20027        Document: 00516955990         Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/03/2023

                                     No. 23-20027

   under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(D)(iii).
             The government preserved this argument in the district court; thus,
   we review for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Reyes-Lugo, 238 F.3d
   305, 307–08 (5th Cir. 2001). “A district court abuses its discretion if it bases
   its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the evi-
   dence.” United States v. Castillo, 430 F.3d 230, 238 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal
   quotation marks and citation omitted). We review questions of statutory con-
   struction or interpretation de novo. United States v. Gomez, 960 F.3d 173, 176–
   77 (5th Cir. 2020).
             The firearms conviction was subject to a ten-year statutory minimum.
   See § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii). Under the plain language of § 924(c)(1)(D)(ii), that
   sentence is to be consecutive to any other term of imprisonment, federal or
   state, and the district court lacked discretion, under 18 U.S.C. § 3584, to im-
   pose concurrent sentences. See United States v. Gonzales, 520 U.S. 1, 6, 11
   (1997); see also Lora v. United States, 599 U.S. 453, 455 (2023); United States
   v. Krumnow, 476 F.3d 294, 298 (5th Cir. 2007). “Given the straightforward
   statutory command” of a consecutive sentence, Gonzales, 520 U.S. at 6, the
   court erred by ordering that Segura’s § 924(c) sentence run concurrently
   with the illegal-reentry sentence, see id. at 6, 11; see also Krumnow, 476 F.3d
   at 298.
             For the foregoing reasons, Segura’s conviction is AFFIRMED, his
   sentence is VACATED, and this matter is REMANDED for resentencing.

                                           2