United States v. Stewart , 168 F. App'x 622 ( 2006 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 23, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-11494
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RONALD EDWARD STEWART,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:04-CR-61-ALL
--------------------
Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ronald Edward Stewart appeals from his guilty-plea
conviction for two counts of bank robbery. He argues that the
district court committed plain error by sentencing him as a
career offender, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b)(C), based upon
his two prior Texas state convictions for burglary of a
habitation. As Stewart concedes, this issue is reviewed only for
plain error because he did not object on this basis in district
court. See United States v. Garcia-Cantu, 302 F.3d 308, 310 (5th
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 04-11494
-2-
Cir. 2002); see also United States v. Villegas, 404 F.3d 355, 363
(5th Cir. 2005). The district court did not commit plain error
on this basis. See United States v. Hornsby, 88 F.3d 336, 339
(5th Cir. 1996).
Stewart also contends that, because his sentence was
increased based upon the finding that he was a career offender,
his Sixth Amendment rights were violated and he should be
resentenced under the mandatory federal Sentencing Guidelines
without reliance upon the career-offender finding. As he
concedes, his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.
United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and by United States v.
Scroggins, 411 F.3d 572 (5th Cir. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.