United States v. Ard – Do It For The Caselaw

Holding: The court affirmed the sentence, holding that although the district court clearly erred in applying a bodily-injury adjustment, the error did not affect the defendant's substantial rights.
Standard: Plain error review
Vote: Per Curiam decision affirming the district court's sentence.
Practical effect: The ruling clarifies that while clear errors in sentencing guideline calculations must be identified, sentences will be affirmed if the record shows the district court would have imposed the same sentence regardless of the error.

The Fifth Circuit affirmed a sentence for conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery and firearm possession, finding a clear error in the district court's application of a sentencing guideline adjustment. Despite the error, the court held that the mistake did not affect the defendant's substantial rights given the district court's reasoning.

Background

Evan Ard appealed his sentence following convictions for conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence. For the first time on appeal, Ard challenged the application of a sentencing guideline adjustment that increased his base offense level by two due to alleged bodily injury to a victim.

The court’s reasoning

The court found that the district court erred in finding that a victim sustained bodily injury during the robbery under United States Sentencing Guidelines section two B one point three subsection B three subsection A three subsection A. This error was clear or obvious in light of a prior decision involving one of Ard’s codefendants. However, the court concluded that the error did not affect Ard’s substantial rights because the district court had reasoned that a sixty-three-month sentence was sufficient based on personal characteristics and other factors under section three five five three A of Title eighteen of the United States Code.

What it means going forward

The ruling clarifies that while clear errors in sentencing guideline calculations must be identified, sentences will be affirmed if the record shows the district court would have imposed the same sentence regardless of the error.