United States v. Lawless, No. 17-1148 (10th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit December 31, 2019 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVID J. LAWLESS, No. 17-1148 (D.C. Nos. 1:16-CV-01499-WYD and 1:11-CR-00278-WYD-1) (D. Colo.) Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _________________________________ Before HARTZ, KELLY, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ This matter is before us on the parties’ Joint Motion for Summary Disposition. David Lawless pleaded guilty to one count of using a destructive device to commit a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The government has conceded that Mr. Lawless’s § 924(c) conviction is invalid under United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019), and the parties have agreed that the appropriate remedy is imposition of a judgment of conviction for arson in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i). * In light of the parties’ joint motion, this matter is submitted on the briefs. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.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. R. 32.1. Upon consideration, the Joint Motion for Summary Disposition is granted. The oral argument scheduled for January 21, 2020 is vacated, this appeal is dismissed, and this matter is remanded with instructions to the district court to vacate the judgment of conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) that was entered January 11, 2013, enter a judgment of conviction for arson, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i), and conduct any and all proceedings necessary to resentence Mr. Lawless on the arson conviction in light of the parties’ Joint Motion for Summary Disposition. The Clerk is directed to issue the mandate forthwith. Entered for the Court Per Curiam 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.
