Court Opinion

ID: 9898772
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-15 01:00:33.047151+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:40.385322
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30172         Document: 00516967323             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/14/2023

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

                                       No. 22-30172                                    FILED
                                     Summary Calendar                          November 14, 2023
                                     ____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Schyler Algernon Smith,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Louisiana
                               USDC No. 5:20-CR-222-2
                      ______________________________

   Before Jones, Smith, and Dennis, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Schuyler Algernon Smith appeals the 262-month sentence imposed
   following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possess
   with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. He argues
   that the district court erred in treating his conviction as a predicate offense
   triggering the U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 career-offender enhancement. Smith posits

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-30172     Document: 00516967323           Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/14/2023

                                    No. 22-30172

   that because inchoate offenses are not listed in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b), which
   defines the term “controlled substance offense,” they are not within that
   term’s definition.
          The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary
   affirmance or, in the alternative, for an extension of time to file its brief.
   Smith correctly concedes that his argument is foreclosed by circuit
   precedent, see United States v. Lightbourn, 115 F.3d 291, 293 (5th Cir. 1997),
   although he urges us to reconsider the issue. In United States v. Vargas, 74
   F.4th 673 (5th Cir. 2023) (en banc), we did so. Vargas “reaffirm[ed] our
   longstanding precedent that inchoate offenses like conspiracy are included in
   the definition of ‘controlled substance offense.’” Id. at 698.
          Where “there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of the
   case,” summary disposition is appropriate. Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis,
   406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, the motion for summary
   affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time is
   DENIED, and district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
          The parties agree that the judgment contains a clerical error in that it
   misspells Smith’s first name. This court has discretion either to reform a
   judgment on appeal or to remand to the district court to do so. United States
   v. Fuentes-Rodriguez, 22 F.4th 504, 506 (5th Cir. 2022). To “reduce the risk
   of future confusion,” we opt for the latter course.        Id.   This case is
   REMANDED for the limited purpose of correcting the error in the
   judgment.

                                         2