Filed: Mar. 28, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-10848 Summary Calendar WILLIE LOUIS EVERITT, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION Respondent-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:94-CV-539-Y - - - - - - - - - - April 24, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appellant appeals the denial
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-10848 Summary Calendar WILLIE LOUIS EVERITT, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION Respondent-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:94-CV-539-Y - - - - - - - - - - April 24, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appellant appeals the denial o..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-10848
Summary Calendar
WILLIE LOUIS EVERITT,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GARY JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL
JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION
Respondent-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:94-CV-539-Y
- - - - - - - - - -
April 24, 1996
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant appeals the denial of his petition for writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner argues
that the state court erred in denying his motion to suppress
evidence; that the evidence was insufficient to support his
conviction for possession of a controlled substance; that the
trial court’s denial of his challenges to two venire members
rendered his trial fundamentally unfair; that his sentence is
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 95-10848
- 2 -
unlawful because the $10,000 fine was not authorized by Texas
statute; and that the trial court erred in dismissing the jury
before it determined whether appellant committed the theft
offense listed in the enhancement allegation of the indictment.
We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for essentially
the reasons adopted by the district court. Everitt v. Johnson,
No. 4:94-CV-539-Y (N.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 1995).
AFFIRMED.