|UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,|
|TERRELLE VINSON MARTIN,|
Before the sentencing hearing Defendant filed a motion arguing that in light of Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), the Sentencing Guidelines were unconstitutional. The district court denied the motion and Defendant appeals.
While this matter was on appeal the United States Supreme Court handed down United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). The government concedes that United States v. Labastida-Segura, 396 F.3d 1140 (10th Cir. 2005), requires Defendant's case to be remanded for resentencing.
We agree and REMAND to the district court for resentencing.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Harris L Hartz
*.After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.