United States v. Guzman

Opinions of the United
2005 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
4-21-2005
USA v. Guzman
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 03-3068
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005
Recommended Citation
"USA v. Guzman" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 1329.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/1329
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 03-3068
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
ROBINSON GUZMAN,
Appellant
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
(Dist Court No. 02-CR-00761)
District Court Judge: Hon. John C. Lifland
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
November 1, 2004
Before: ALITO, BARRY, and FUENTES Circuit Judges.
(Filed: April 21, 2005)
OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM:
After pleading guilty pursuant to a plea agreement, the defendant in this case was
sentenced under the Sentencing Guidelines. The sentencing occurred prior to the
Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. ___ 125 S. Ct. 738
(2005). Defense counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), and has moved to withdraw. Our review of the record has disclosed only one
non-frivolous issue that could be raised on appeal, namely, that the District Court erred in
sentencing the defendant under the erroneous belief that the Sentencing Guidelines were
mandatory rather than advisory. Moreover, having determined that issues with respect to
Booker are best determined by the District Court in the first instance, we vacate the
sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance with that opinion.