Filed: Aug. 30, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10311 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus THOMAS STEELE, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98-CR-166-1-A - August 26, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Thomas Steele appeals his sentence following his guilty plea to possession and passing of counterfeit securities of a
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10311 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus THOMAS STEELE, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98-CR-166-1-A - August 26, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Thomas Steele appeals his sentence following his guilty plea to possession and passing of counterfeit securities of an..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-10311
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
THOMAS STEELE,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:98-CR-166-1-A
--------------------
August 26, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Thomas Steele appeals his sentence following his guilty plea
to possession and passing of counterfeit securities of an
organization, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 513(a). He contends
that the district court erred by departing upward from the
sentencing range found in the presentence investigative report.
The district court did not err in upwardly departing based
on a determination that Steele’s criminal history category and
offense level did not adequately reflect the seriousness of his
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 99-10311
-2-
criminal conduct and his likelihood of recidivism. The reasons
given by the district court for the departure were acceptable,
and the departure itself, given both Steele’s extensive criminal
conduct and the statutory maximum for this crime, was reasonable.
See United States v. Lambert,
984 F.2d 658, 663 (5th Cir. 1993)
(en banc). Further, the district court adequately explained the
reasons why the upward departure to offense level 24 was
appropriate. See
Lambert, 984 F.2d at 662-63.
AFFIRMED.