USA v. Davis Reed

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
____________

No. 26-50066
Summary Calendar
____________

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Aaron Davis Reed,

Defendant—Appellant.
______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:25-CR-37-1
______________________________

Before Davis, Stewart, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:
*

Aaron Davis Reed appeals from the 18-month sentence of
imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction for escape. He
first challenges the procedural reasonableness of the sentence on the ground
that the district court mistakenly believed that he had escaped twice instead
of once. Because the district court admitted its misunderstanding during
sentencing and stated that the error had no effect on the sentence, Reed has

*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
August 14, 2026

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 26-50066 Document: 61-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/14/2026

No. 26-50066
2
not shown that the district court selected the sentence based on a clearly
erroneous fact. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). In any event,
the district court’s statement shows that any error was harmless. See United
States v. Robinson, 741 F.3d 588, 601 (5th Cir. 2014).
For the first time on appeal, Reed argues that the district court erred
by adding one criminal history point under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(e) for
committing the instant offense while under a criminal justice sentence
because that adjustment punishes him a second time for the same underlying
act of escape. Although he acknowledges that this argument is contrary to
United States v. Vickers, 891 F.2d 86, 87 (5th Cir. 1989), he contends that
Vickers was undermined in this context by Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S.
36, 38 (1993). As Reed is not relying on any cases that specifically support
his argument, he has not shown plain error on this basis. See United States v.
Vargas-Soto, 700 F.3d 180, 182 (5th Cir. 2012).
AFFIRMED.
Case: 26-50066 Document: 61-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/14/2026