United States v. Roy Mack West, A.K.A. Teeny Man, Etc.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roy MacK WEST, A.K.A. Teeny Man, Etc., Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
This case comes before us by order of the United States Supreme Court, which has vacated the judgment of this Court as to appellant Roy Mack West, and remanded the case for our reconsideration in light of Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813 , 119 S.Ct. 1707 , 143 L.Ed.2d 985 (1999).
See United States v. West, 142 F.3d 1408 (11th Cir.1998), vacated and remanded, — U.S. -, 119 S.Ct. 2042 , 144 L.Ed.2d 211 (1999). In Richardson , the Supreme Court held that “a jury in a federal criminal case brought under [21 U.S.C.] § 848 must unanimously agree not only that the defendant committed some ‘continuing series of violations’ but also that the defendant committed each of the individual ‘violations’ necessary to make up that ‘continuing series.’ ” 526 U.S. at -, 119 S.Ct. at 1709 .
West was convicted of both conducting a continuing criminal enterprise (“CCE”)(Count 1) and being a member of the underlying drug conspiracy (Count 2). At sentencing, the court vacated Count 2 as a lesser included offense of the CCE conviction.
See United States v. Nixon, 918 F.2d 895, 908 (11th Cir.1990) (when defendant convicted on both a CCE count and a conspiracy count, the Court will merge the two offenses by vacating the conviction of the lesser included conspiracy count). The government concedes that the jury instruction given was not in accord with the requirements of Richardson and that West’s conviction on the CCE count cannot stand, see also United States v. Riley, No. 96-4653, 161 F.3d 20 (11th Cir.l998)(unpublished), and requests that this Court remand to the district court with instructions to reinstate the vacated drug conspiracy count and resentence West.
Accordingly, we vacate West’s conviction for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise. Since the conspiracy conviction under Count 2 was vacated only because it was a lesser included offense of the CCE conviction, and the CCE conviction no longer stands, we remand this case to the district court with instructions to reinstate West’s conspiracy conviction under Count 2 and resentence him.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(remanding to district court with instructions to reinstate conviction for lesser included offense following appellate vacation of the defendant’s more serious conviction)
-
(vacating defendant’s CCE conviction and remanding to district court with instruction to reinstate previously vacated conspiracy conviction)
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.