Filed: Mar. 22, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-11115 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus TERRANCE WAGGONER, also known as Terrence Waggoner, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:01-CR-45-4-A - March 21, 2002 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Terrance Waggoner has appealed the district court’s upward departure from the Sentencing Guideline
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-11115 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus TERRANCE WAGGONER, also known as Terrence Waggoner, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:01-CR-45-4-A - March 21, 2002 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Terrance Waggoner has appealed the district court’s upward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-11115
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TERRANCE WAGGONER, also known as Terrence Waggoner,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:01-CR-45-4-A
--------------------
March 21, 2002
Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Terrance Waggoner has appealed the district court’s upward
departure from the Sentencing Guidelines for his conviction
of conspiracy to use identities fraudulently, in violation of
18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1028.
Waggoner contends that the district court abused its
discretion by departing upwardly, because there was insufficient
evidence that some of the victims suffered severe emotional
trauma or serious credit problems as a result of his conduct.
This is refuted by testimony and reports furnished by some of the
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-11115
-2-
28 victims of the scheme. See U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1 (2000); United
States v. Wells,
101 F.3d 370, 371-74 (5th Cir. 1996).
AFFIRMED.