Filed: Mar. 07, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-10393 Conference Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CARY DEON MCGOWAN, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:89cr00203 - - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Cary Deon McGowan appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for r
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-10393 Conference Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CARY DEON MCGOWAN, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:89cr00203 - - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Cary Deon McGowan appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for re..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-10393
Conference Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CARY DEON MCGOWAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:89cr00203
- - - - - - - - - -
February 29, 1996
Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Cary Deon McGowan appeals from the district court's denial
of his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2). The district court did not err by concluding that
U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, comment. (n.1), amendment 484, was not
applicable and by not conducting an evidentiary hearing on the
matter. See United States v. Allison, 63 F.3d 350, 353 (5th
Cir.), cert. denied,
116 S. Ct. 405 (1995).
AFFIRMED.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
