Filed: Jan. 23, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ Nos. 94-41076 & 95-30579 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOE ALLEN BOUNDS, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. CR 88-50038-02 - - - - - - - - - - January 17, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Joe Allen Bounds appeals the denial of his motion for a new t
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ Nos. 94-41076 & 95-30579 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOE ALLEN BOUNDS, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. CR 88-50038-02 - - - - - - - - - - January 17, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Joe Allen Bounds appeals the denial of his motion for a new tr..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
Nos. 94-41076 & 95-30579
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOE ALLEN BOUNDS,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. CR 88-50038-02
- - - - - - - - - -
January 17, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Joe Allen Bounds appeals the denial of his motion for a new
trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence; the denial of
his motion for a new trial or, in the alternative, a writ of
error coram nobis on grounds of ineffective assistance of
counsel; and the sentencing judge's factual findings on
resentencing regarding drug quantities. We have reviewed
Bounds's contentions of error and the record. We find that
Bounds's ineffective-assistance claims are not adequately
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
Nos. 94-41076 & 95-30579
-2-
developed for review on direct appeal. See United States v.
Higdon,
832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir. 1987), cert. denied,
484
U.S. 1075 (1988). We otherwise find no reversible error.
Therefore, the decisions of the district court are AFFIRMED
without prejudice to Bounds's ability to raise his ineffective-
assistance contentions in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding.