Filed: Jun. 19, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 19, 2008 No. 07-10911 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JIMMIE LOUIS ELLISON Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-141-ALL Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jimmie Louis Ellison appeals the 23-month
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 19, 2008 No. 07-10911 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JIMMIE LOUIS ELLISON Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-141-ALL Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jimmie Louis Ellison appeals the 23-month ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 19, 2008
No. 07-10911
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JIMMIE LOUIS ELLISON
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CR-141-ALL
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jimmie Louis Ellison appeals the 23-month sentence of imprisonment he
received upon revocation of his supervised release. He asserts that his sentence
is in violation of the principles announced in United States v. Booker,
543 U.S.
220 (2005), Blakely v. Washington,
542 U.S. 296 (2004), and Apprendi v. New
Jersey,
530 U.S. 466 (2000), because in revoking his supervised release, the
district court is permitted to increase the maximum sentence beyond 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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 07-10911
maximum supported by a jury verdict or admitted by a defendant. Ellison
acknowledges that this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Hinson,
429
F.3d 114 (5th Cir. 2005).
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.
2