Filed: Jun. 16, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-41106 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE CADENA-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-98-CR-134-3 - - - - - - - - - - June 16, 1999 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jose Cadena-Diaz appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to possession of a pro
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-41106 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE CADENA-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-98-CR-134-3 - - - - - - - - - - June 16, 1999 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jose Cadena-Diaz appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to possession of a proh..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-41106
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE CADENA-DIAZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-98-CR-134-3
- - - - - - - - - -
June 16, 1999
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Cadena-Diaz appeals his sentence after pleading guilty
to possession of a prohibited object by an inmate. He contends
that the district court relied on improper grounds in departing
upward. After reviewing the record and the briefs of the
parties, we hold that Cadena-Diaz has not shown any error, plain
or otherwise, in the district court’s decision to depart upward.
See United States v. Alford,
142 F.3d 825, 830 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied,
119 S. Ct. 514 (1998). Accordingly, the district court’s
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
-2-
judgment is AFFIRMED.