The Fifth Circuit dismissed an appeal because the district court lacked jurisdiction to resentence the defendant after the statutory deadline had passed. The court held that the amended judgment entered more than fourteen days after the original sentencing was void.
The defendant pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft and received a sentence running concurrently with a state term. The district court later resentenced the defendant to a consecutive term and entered an amended judgment, which the defendant appealed.
The court’s reasoning
The court agreed with the parties that the district court lacked jurisdiction to correct the original sentence by resentencing because it occurred more than fourteen days after the original sentencing. Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure thirty-five and Rule forty-five, the resentencing and amended judgment were void. Consequently, there was no valid judgment from which the defendant could appeal.
What it means going forward
The original sentence and judgment remain in effect, but the defendant’s appeal regarding the amended judgment is dismissed due to the lack of a valid underlying judgment.
