From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Walker

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Apr 6, 2017
No. 16-1429 (10th Cir. Apr. 6, 2017)

Opinion

No. 16-1429

04-06-2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL WALKER, JR., Defendant - Appellant.


(D.C. Nos. 1:16-CV-01381-LTB and 1:06-CR-00320-LTB-2)
(D. Colo.) ORDER AND JUDGMENT Before MATHESON, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. 32.1. --------

This matter comes on for consideration of the defendant's response to this court's order of March 24, 2017, in which the defendant was ordered to show cause why the district court judgment should not be summarily affirmed in light of the Supreme Court decision in Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017) (holding that the United States Sentencing Guidelines, including § 4B1.2(a), are not subject to vagueness challenges under the Due Process Clause). In response, the defendant states that "Undersigned counsel has failed to identify any legal argument refuting that Beckles controls this case." Response at p.1.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court

Per Curiam


Summaries of

United States v. Walker

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Apr 6, 2017
No. 16-1429 (10th Cir. Apr. 6, 2017)
Case details for

United States v. Walker

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL WALKER, JR.…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 6, 2017

Citations

No. 16-1429 (10th Cir. Apr. 6, 2017)