Filed: Jun. 08, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-50605 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CURTIS M. SHUBIN, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-96-CR-138-1 - - - - - - - - - - May 29, 1998 Before JONES, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Curtis M. Shubin appeals his conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felo
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-50605 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CURTIS M. SHUBIN, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-96-CR-138-1 - - - - - - - - - - May 29, 1998 Before JONES, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Curtis M. Shubin appeals his conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-50605
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CURTIS M. SHUBIN,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-96-CR-138-1
- - - - - - - - - -
May 29, 1998
Before JONES, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Curtis M. Shubin appeals his conviction and sentence for
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, a violation of 18
U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
Shubin contends that the district court erred in denying him
a full three-point offense-level reduction for acceptance of
responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b)(1). Because Shubin has
not demonstrated that he “timely provid[ed] complete information
to the government concerning his own involvement in the offense,”
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 97-50605
-2-
the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying him
the full § 3E1.1(b) reduction. See United States v. Mills,
9
F.3d 1132, 1136 (5th Cir. 1993); United States v. Gonzales,
19
F.3d 982, 983 (5th Cir. 1994); § 3E1.1(b)(1).
Shubin’s argument that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) is
unconstitutional is foreclosed by this court’s holding in United
States v. Rawls,
85 F.3d 240, 242-43 (5th Cir. 1996).
AFFIRMED.