USA v. Ramon Daniels, et al, No. 12-30413 (5th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on July 17, 2013.
Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 12-30413 September 5, 2013 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAMON TERRELL DANIELS; JECARLOS MONTRAE CARTER; TENISHA DESHEA CARTER; ANTONIO DEMETRIOUS FURLOW; GRANSIHI DEON MIMS, also known as Granshi; AUBURN THOMAS, also known as Big, Defendants-Appellants Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana ON PETITION FOR REHEARING Before KING, DAVIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge: In this Petition for Panel Rehearing, Defendants JeCarlos Montrae Carter, Tenisha Deshea Carter, Antonio Demetrious Furlow, Gransihi Deon Mims, and Auburn Thomas argue that the sentences on their substantive counts should be vacated and remanded for resentencing because those sentences are intertwined with their now-vacated sentences on the conspiracy count.1 In other words, they 1 Defendant Ramon Terrell Daniels did not petition for rehearing, as we have already remanded both of his counts (Count 1 and Count 8) for resentencing. No. 12-30413 argue that in addition to being resentenced on the conspiracy count, they are entitled to be resentenced on their substantive counts as well. While arguing that resentencing on the substantive counts is not required, the Government does not oppose vacating the sentences on the substantive counts and agrees that defendants should have their offense levels recalculated because, using grouping principles, their Guidelines range calculations were driven by the conspiracy s now-vacated 5 kilogram finding. Accordingly, we VACATE the sentences of all defendants and REMAND the case for resentencing consistent with this Order. The Petition for Panel Rehearing is GRANTED to this extent and this extent only. The Petition is otherwise denied. 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.
