Opinion
Case No. 19-4206
12-16-2020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RONALD JACKSON, JR., Defendant-Appellant.
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION
File Name: 20a0698n.06 ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 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 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.