Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Sheldon H. Thomas, 00-1004 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 00-1004 Visitors: 11
Filed: May 30, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 00-1004 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * District of Nebraska. * Sheldon H. Thomas, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. * _ Submitted: May 24, 2000 Filed: May 30, 2000 _ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Sheldon Thomas appeals the 121-month sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distr
More
                      United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                      ___________

                                      No. 00-1004
                                      ___________

United States of America,                  *
                                           *
             Appellee,                     * Appeal from the United States
                                           * District Court for the
      v.                                   * District of Nebraska.
                                           *
Sheldon H. Thomas,                         *      [UNPUBLISHED]
                                           *
             Appellant.                    *
                                      ___________

                            Submitted: May 24, 2000
                                Filed: May 30, 2000
                                    ___________

Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
                             ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Sheldon Thomas appeals the 121-month sentence imposed by the district court1
after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21
U.S.C. ยง 846. Thomas raises one issue on appeal, that his sentence is excessive
because the sentencing disparity between cocaine base and powder cocaine lacks a
rational basis. However, this court has repeatedly rejected that contention and as a
panel we are not free to revisit the issue. See, e.g., United States v. Clary, 
34 F.3d 709
,


      1
       The HONORABLE JOSEPH H. BATAILLON, United States District Judge for
the District of Nebraska.
712 (8th Cir. 1994) (collecting cases), cert. denied, 513 U .S. 1182 (1995).
Accordingly, we affirm.

     A true copy.

           Attest:

                    CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                                    -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer