United States v. Ronald Jackson, Jr. ( 2020 )

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION
File Name: 20a0698n.06
Case No. 19-4206
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED
Dec 16, 2020
DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED
) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
v. ) THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
) OHIO
RONALD JACKSON, JR., )
Defendant-Appellant. )
)
BEFORE: CLAY, GILMAN, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges.
THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Ronald Jackson, Jr. robbed a 7-Eleven at gunpoint. He was
caught the next day, and the federal government charged him with three crimes: robbery, using
and brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, and possessing a firearm and ammunition as
a felon. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951(a) (robbery), 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) (brandishing), 922(g)(1) (felon in
possession). Jackson pled guilty to all three crimes. He now appeals his conviction for the second
crime—brandishing a gun during a crime of violence. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
Jackson argues for the first time on appeal that robbery does not count as a crime of
violence. See 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (defining robbery). But we have already held that it does. See
United States v. Gooch, 850 F.3d 285, 291–92 (6th Cir. 2017) (holding that robbery as defined by
18 U.S.C. § 1951 qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)); see also United States
v. Camp, 903 F.3d 594, 597 (6th Cir. 2018) (same). Thus, the district court did not err—much less
Case No. 19-4206, United States v. Jackson
plainly err—in accepting Jackson’s plea and sentencing him based on the robbery constituting a
crime of violence. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b). And since Jackson does not challenge his
convictions or sentence on any other grounds, we affirm.
-2-