Filed: Mar. 07, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-10570 Conference Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHESTER GLENN BROWN, a/k/a Sealed Defendant 1, a/k/a, Baldy, a/k/a Gangsta, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:95-CR-025-H - - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Chester Glenn Brown
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-10570 Conference Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHESTER GLENN BROWN, a/k/a Sealed Defendant 1, a/k/a, Baldy, a/k/a Gangsta, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:95-CR-025-H - - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Chester Glenn Brown ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-10570
Conference Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CHESTER GLENN BROWN, a/k/a
Sealed Defendant 1, a/k/a, Baldy,
a/k/a Gangsta,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:95-CR-025-H
- - - - - - - - - -
February 29, 1996
Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Chester Glenn Brown appeals his guilty-plea conviction of
conspiracy to distribute cocaine base. Section 841, Title 21,
of the United States Code does not violate the Commerce Clause,
and the sentencing disparity between powder cocaine and crack
cocaine does not violate equal protection rights. See United
States v. Clark,
67 F.3d 1154, 1165 (5th Cir. 1995); United
States v. Cherry,
50 F.3d 338, 342-44 (5th Cir. 1995). The
appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 95-10570
-2-