Filed: Apr. 03, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-10742 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ERIC BRYANT, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:95-CR-005-A - - - - - - - - - - April 26, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Eric Bryant argues that his right to due process was violated by the district court’s refusal to gr
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-10742 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ERIC BRYANT, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:95-CR-005-A - - - - - - - - - - April 26, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Eric Bryant argues that his right to due process was violated by the district court’s refusal to gra..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-10742
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ERIC BRYANT,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:95-CR-005-A
- - - - - - - - - -
April 26, 1996
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eric Bryant argues that his right to due process was
violated by the district court’s refusal to grant his motion for
a downward departure. Because we lack jurisdiction to review the
district court’s exercise of its discretion in denying the motion
for a downward departure, unless the court’s refusal was the
result of a violation of law or a misapplication of the
Sentencing Guidelines, the appeal is DISMISSED. United States v.
DiMarco, 46 F.3d 476, 477 (5th Cir. 1995).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
DISMISSED.
