Filed: Jul. 25, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 96-10102 (Summary Calendar) _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus IRWIN I. GROSSMAN, also known as Ira, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas (3:95-CV-0227-H) July 17, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Irwin I. Grossman appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursu
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 96-10102 (Summary Calendar) _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus IRWIN I. GROSSMAN, also known as Ira, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas (3:95-CV-0227-H) July 17, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Irwin I. Grossman appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursua..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 96-10102
(Summary Calendar)
_________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
IRWIN I. GROSSMAN, also known as Ira,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Texas
(3:95-CV-0227-H)
July 17, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Irwin I. Grossman appeals the district court’s denial of his
motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2255. grossman argues that his convictions violate
principles of double jeopardy because the indictment was
multiplicious and that counsel was ineffective for failing to
challenge the indictment in the district court and on direct
appeal. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
Accordingly, we affirm for essentially the reasons adopted by the
district court. See Grossman v. United States, No. 3:95-CV-0227-H,
3:92-CR-250-H (N.D. Tex. Jan. 2, 1996).
AFFIRMED.
-2-