Filed: Oct. 28, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-50057 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JESSE ROLAND FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-92-CR-69-1 - - - - - - - - - - October 21, 1997 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jesse Roland Flores, federal inmate ##25755-138, appeals the denial of hi
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-50057 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JESSE ROLAND FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-92-CR-69-1 - - - - - - - - - - October 21, 1997 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jesse Roland Flores, federal inmate ##25755-138, appeals the denial of his..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-50057
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JESSE ROLAND FLORES,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-92-CR-69-1
- - - - - - - - - -
October 21, 1997
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jesse Roland Flores, federal inmate ##25755-138, appeals the
denial of his motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We
detect no abuse of discretion in the court’s denial of the
motion. Although the guideline amendments upon which Flores
premised his motion are given retroactive effect, these
amendments do not apply to Flores’ sentence. See Flores v.
United States, No. SA-92-CR-69 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 19, 1996).
This appeal is without arguable merit and thus is frivolous.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 97-50057
-2-
See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. The appeal is DISMISSED. We caution
Flores that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will
invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Flores
is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that
they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.