Filed: Feb. 17, 2004
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-41080 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SANDRO MEDINA-TENIENTE, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-03-CR-357-ALL - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Sandro Medina-Tenie
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-41080 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SANDRO MEDINA-TENIENTE, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-03-CR-357-ALL - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Sandro Medina-Tenien..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 18, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-41080
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SANDRO MEDINA-TENIENTE,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. B-03-CR-357-ALL
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Sandro Medina-Teniente pleaded guilty to being found
unlawfully present in the United States after deportation, in
violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that the special
condition of supervised release that prohibits him from
possessing a “dangerous weapon,” which is contained in the
written judgment, conflicts with the district court’s oral
pronouncement of sentence and must be deleted. His argument is
foreclosed by this court’s opinion in United States v.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-41080
-2-
Torres-Aguilar,
352 F.3d 394, 937-38 (5th Cir. 2003). The
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of
filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks
that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.