USA v. Marcus Williams, No. 09-30771 (5th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 09-30771 Document: 00511480203 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/17/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 09-30771 Summary Calendar May 17, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MARCUS C WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:08-CR-81-1 Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* A grand jury indicted Marcus C. Williams for one count of violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) by possessing four firearms and ammunition after having been convicted of a felony. Williams pleaded not guilty and proceeded to trial. Although witnesses testified that he possessed all four firearms listed in the indictment, as well as ammunition, the jury found Williams guilty of violating § 922(g)(1) only with respect to a single pistol. When the district court calculated his guideline range of imprisonment, it held Williams accountable for possessing * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. Case: 09-30771 Document: 00511480203 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/17/2011 No. 09-30771 all four firearms, despite his objection. The court then sentenced him to the statutory maximum term of 120 months of imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2). Williams argues that the district court violated his constitutional rights by taking into account conduct that the jury acquitted him of committing, but he correctly acknowledges that this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Watts, 519 U.S. 148, 157 (1997). He also contends that his sentence violates his Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial because it would not pass muster under the review for reasonableness set forth in the remedial opinion in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), except for the judge s finding that Williams possessed the three firearms that the jury acquitted him of possessing. However, we recently held that [i]rrespective of whether Supreme Court precedent has foreclosed as-applied Sixth Amendment challenges to sentences within the statutory maximum that are reasonable only if based on judge-found facts, such challenges are foreclosed under our precedent. United States v. Hernandez, 633 F.3d 370, 374 (5th Cir. 2011) (footnote omitted). AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
