No. 06-51489
444444444444444444444444
In The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. IGNACIO RAMOS AND JOSE ALONSO COMPEAN, Defendants-Appellants.
________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas
_______________
BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF CONGRESSMAN WALTER B. JONES,
CONGRESSMAN VIRGIL H. GOODE, JR., CONGRESSMAN TED POE,
GUN OWNERS FOUNDATION,
U.S. BORDER CONTROL FOUNDATION,
U.S. BORDER CONTROL, AND
CONSERVATIVE LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND
IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS
________________
J. MARK BREWER
WILLIAM J. OLSON
BREWER & PRITCHARD
HERBERT W. TITUS
Three Riverway, 14th Floor
JOHN S. MILES
Houston, TX 77056
JEREMIAH L. MORGAN
(713) 209-2950
WILLIAM J. OLSON, P.C
8180 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1070
Attorney of Record
McLean, VA 22102-3860
(703) 356-5070
May 24, 2007
Counsel for Amici Curiae
444444444444444444444444
Page 2
i
Case No. 06-51489
IN THE UNTIED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
IGNACIO RAMOS AND JOSE ALONSO COMPEAN
Defendants-Appellants
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS
The undersigned counsel of record certifies that the following listed persons and entities as described in the fourth sentence of Rule 28.2.1 have an interest in the outcome of this case. These representations are made in order that the judges of this court may evaluate possible disqualification or recusal.
Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, Appellants David L. Botsford and Mary Stillinger, Appellant Ramos’ counsel on appeal Robert T. Baskett, Appellant Compean’s counsel on appeal United States of America, Appellee
Page 3
ii
Congressman Walter B. Jones, Congressman Virgil H. Goode, Jr.,
Congressman Ted Poe, Gun Owners Foundation, U.S. Border Control Foundation,
U.S. Border Control, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund, Amici
Curiae
Mark Brewer, William J. Olson, Herbert W. Titus, John S. Miles, and
Jeremiah L. Morgan, counsel for Amici Curiae
Pursuant to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 29(c), and 5th
Circuit Rule 28.2.1, it is hereby certified that amici curiae Gun Owners
Foundation, U.S. Border Control Foundation, U.S. Border Control, and
Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund are non-stock, nonprofit
corporations, have no parent companies, and no person or entity owns them or any part of them.
____________________________
J. Mark Brewer
Attorney of Record for Amici Curiae
Page 4
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Certificate of Interested Persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
Table of Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Interest of the Amici Curiae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Argument
I.
The Plain Error Rule Applies to Defendant Ramos’ and Defendant
Compean’s Challenges to the Legal Sufficiency of Counts Four and
Five of the Indictment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
II.
The Failure to Charge Defendants in Counts Four and Five with the
Crime Defined in 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c)(1)(A) Meets Each of the
Four Plain Error Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
A.
Each of Counts Four and Five of the Indictment Contains an
Erroneous Allegation of the Offense Defined in 18 U.S.C.
Section 924(c)(1)(A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B.
The Misdescription in Counts Four and Five of the Offense
Defined in 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c)(1)(A) Was Plainly
Erroneous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
C.
The Misdescription in Counts Four and Five of the Offense
Defined in 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c)(1)(A) Affected
Defendants’ Substantial Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
D.
The Misdescription of the Offense Purportedly Charged in
Counts Four and Five Seriously Affects the Fairness, Integrity
and Reputation of Judicial Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Page 5
iv
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
CASES
Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137 (1995) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545 (2002) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4, passim
Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461 (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 9
Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 (1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 11
United States v. Barton, 257 F.3d 433 (5
th
Cir. 2001) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4, passim
United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 U.S. 564 (1977) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
United States v. McGilberry, 480 F.3d 326 (5
th
Cir. 2007) . . . . . . . . . . . 4, passim
United States v. Meshack, 255 F.3d 556 (5
th
Cir. 2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 9
FEDERAL STATUTES
18 U.S.C. Section 924 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, passim
FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Rule 52 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
MISCELLANEOUS
H. Packer, The Limits of the Criminal Sanction (Stanford Univ. Press: 196 . . 15
Page 6
1
INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE
Congressmen Walter B. Jones, Congressman Virgil H. Goode, Jr., and
Congressman Ted Poe are members of the United States House of Representatives,
representing the citizens of the Third Congressional District of North Carolina, the
Fifth Congressional District of Virginia, and the Second Congressional District of
Texas, respectively. All three Congressmen have a keen interest in the correct
interpretation and implementation of the law, and particularly federal law. Each of
them has demonstrated a special interest in this case because of the serious concerns
each has about the interpretation and implementation of 18 U.S.C. Section
924(c)(1)(A) against the defendants in the court below.
Gun Owners Foundation (“GOFâ€