Filed: Apr. 21, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-50531 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MANUEL VILLARREAL, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (W-95-CR 007 23) April 4, 1997 Before JOHNSON, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Manuel Villarreal appeals his sentence following his guilty- plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana. The
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-50531 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MANUEL VILLARREAL, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (W-95-CR 007 23) April 4, 1997 Before JOHNSON, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Manuel Villarreal appeals his sentence following his guilty- plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana. The d..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-50531
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MANUEL VILLARREAL,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the
Western District of Texas
(W-95-CR 007 23)
April 4, 1997
Before JOHNSON, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Manuel Villarreal appeals his sentence following his guilty-
plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
The district court did not clearly error in determining the amount
of marihuana attributable to him for sentencing purposes. See
United States v. Angulo,
927 F.2d 202, 205 (5th Cir. 1991).
Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion by
denying prior to sentencing Villarreal’s motion for appointment of
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 Local Rule 47.5.4.
a polygraph expert. See United States v. Patterson,
724 F.2d 1128,
1130 (5th Cir. 1984).
2