Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Bolan, 95-10361 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 95-10361 Visitors: 59
Filed: Jan. 22, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-10361 (Summary Calendar) _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus BERT WAYNE BOLAN, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (USDC No. 4:94-CR-131-A-01) - - - - - - - - - - January 7, 1996 Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appellant appeals from his conviction and sentence for conspiracy and mail fraud. He
More
                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                            __________________

                               No. 95-10361
                            (Summary Calendar)
                            __________________


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                             Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                    versus

BERT WAYNE BOLAN,

                                             Defendant-Appellant.



                        - - - - - - - - - -
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Northern District of Texas
                    (USDC No. 4:94-CR-131-A-01)
                        - - - - - - - - - -
                          January 7, 1996
Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appellant    appeals    from    his   conviction   and   sentence   for

conspiracy and mail fraud.      He argues that his conviction violates

the Double Jeopardy Clause and that the district court erred by

misapplying the sentencing guidelines, by upwardly departing in

imposing Bolan's fine, and by refusing to grant the Government's

motion pursuant to U.S.S.G. ยง 5K1.1, p.s, for downward departure.

We have reviewed the record and the transcript of the sentencing


     *
        Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
hearing in   the   district   court       and   find   no   reversible   error.

Accordingly, we affirm appellant's conviction and sentence.

AFFIRMED.




                                      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