USA v. Jaquentez Myers, No. 15-11103 (5th Cir. 2017)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-11103 Document: 00513972721 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/28/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-11103 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 28, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JAQUENTEZ MYERS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15-CR-115-1 Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jaquentez Myers appeals the sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. He contends that the district court committed plain error by increasing his sentence based on two prior Texas convictions for burglary of a habitation that were deemed “crimes of violence” under the applicable 2014 edition of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-11103 Document: 00513972721 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/28/2017 No. 15-11103 Myers contends that Texas definition of burglary of a habitation is broader than the generic definition of burglary of a dwelling, and that the court could not use the modified categorical approach because the statute is not divisible. The Texas statute is divisible. See United States v. Uribe, 838 F.3d 667, 670-71 (5th Cir. 2016) (addressing the effect of Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016)), cert. denied, 2017 WL 661924 (Mar. 20, 2017) (No. 167969). The relevant court documents, properly consulted under the modified categorical approach, show that Myers was convicted of violating Texas Penal Code § 30.02(a)(1), which matches sufficiently the generic definition of burglary of a dwelling. See United States v. Conde-Castaneda, 753 F.3d 172, 175-79 (5th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, the judgment is 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.