
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Franklin GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10287
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    July 5, 2012.
    Matthew Joseph Kacsmaryk, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Kevin Joel Page, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Jerry Van Beard, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Dallas, TX, Christopher Allen Curtis, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendanb-Appellant.
    Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PER CURIAM:

This court affirmed the district court’s consideration of Defendant Franklin Garcia’s rehabilitative needs when imposing a term of imprisonment after revocation of Garcia’s supervised release. We did so based on then-valid circuit precedent. See United States v. Breland, 647 F.3d 284 (5th Cir.2011), vacated by — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1096, 181 L.Ed.2d 973 (2012). Consistent with its decision to vacate in Breland, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded the judgment in the present case, instructing that we reconsider in light of the Government’s change in position as described in its brief to the Supreme Court. Garcia v. United States, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2378, — L.Ed.2d -(2012).

In its Supreme Court brief, the Government stated that “in light of the disposition of the petition for certiorari in Breland and the position asserted by the Solicitor General in his brief for the United States filed in that case, this Court should, as in Breland, grant the petition, vacate the judgment, and remand to the court of appeals for further consideration.” Brief for the United States, Garcia v. United States, 2012 WL 1743230, at *11 (April 11, 2012). The Government’s position accords with how the First Circuit, Eighth Circuit, and the Ninth Circuit have resolved this issue. United States v. Molignaro, 649 F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir.2011); United States v. Taylor, 679 F.3d 1005, 1006-07 (8th Cir.2012); United States v. Grant, 664 F.3d 276, 282 (9th Cir.2011).

Accordingly, this matter is REMANDED to the district court for resentencing in accordance with this order. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     