United States v. Robert Francis Stokes

972 F.2d 1347 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Francis STOKES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-30161. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 6, 1992. * Decided Aug. 12, 1992. Before ALARCON, RYMER and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 After Robert Stokes pleaded guilty to two federal robbery charges pursuant to a plea bargaining agreement, the district court sentenced him to a 100-month term to run consecutive to an unexpired, 90-month, state sentence which Stokes is currently serving. Stokes appeals this sentencing decision on two grounds. Stokes first argues that the district court unlawfully departed from the Sentencing Guidelines by handing down a consecutive, rather than a concurrent, term. Stokes also argues that the court erred by considering charges dismissed under the plea bargain in its decision to impose a consecutive sentence. We have jurisdiction under 18…