Filed: Oct. 05, 2006
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 October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-20143 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CARLOS RAY SMITH, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-355 - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgment in a Cr
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-20143 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CARLOS RAY SMITH, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-355 - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgment in a Cri..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-20143
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CARLOS RAY SMITH,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CR-355
--------------------
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Carlos Ray Smith
presents arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United
States v. Daugherty,
264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001), which
rejected a Commerce Clause challenge to the felon-in-possession-
of-a-firearm statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). The Government’s
motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the
district court is AFFIRMED.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.