Filed: Mar. 31, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: ON REHEARING UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-4551 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KEMP SHIDER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CR-02-123) Submitted: February 16, 2005 Decided: March 31, 2005 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. James H
Summary: ON REHEARING UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-4551 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KEMP SHIDER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CR-02-123) Submitted: February 16, 2005 Decided: March 31, 2005 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. James H...
More
ON REHEARING
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4551
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
KEMP SHIDER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (CR-02-123)
Submitted: February 16, 2005 Decided: March 31, 2005
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James H. Moss, MOSS, KUHN & FLEMING, P.A., Beaufort, South
Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States
Attorney, Miller W. Shealy, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney,
Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Kemp Shider petitions this court for rehearing of his
earlier appeal. In light of United States v. Booker,
125 S. Ct.
738 (2005), and United States v. Hughes,
2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 4331
(4th Cir. Mar. 16, 2005), we grant the petition for rehearing
solely as to the sentence and find that the district court plainly
erred in imposing a sentence that exceeded the maximum allowed
based on facts established by Shider’s guilty plea. We therefore
vacate the sentence and remand for proceedings consistent with
Hughes. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
- 2 -