Filed: Sep. 14, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-50730 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LIBORIO GARCIA-AGUILAR, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-97-CR-319-1 - - - - - - - - - - September 13, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Liborio Garcia-Aguilar appeals his jury conviction for aiding and abetti
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-50730 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LIBORIO GARCIA-AGUILAR, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-97-CR-319-1 - - - - - - - - - - September 13, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Liborio Garcia-Aguilar appeals his jury conviction for aiding and abettin..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-50730
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LIBORIO GARCIA-AGUILAR,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. DR-97-CR-319-1
- - - - - - - - - -
September 13, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Liborio Garcia-Aguilar appeals his jury conviction for
aiding and abetting the illegal transportation of aliens and
aiding and abetting the harboring of illegal aliens. Garcia-
Aguilar argues that the district court erred in denying his
motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds. Specifically, Garcia-
Aguilar argues that the court erred in failing to give reasons
for its continuance following the January docket call and that
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 98-50730
-2-
the court’s nunc pro tunc continuance after the speedy trial
period had lapsed was inconsistent with the Speedy Trial Act.
The Speedy Trial Act “does not expressly require that the
ends-of-justice findings be entered contemporaneously on the
record, just that they be entered on the record.” United States
v. Jones,
56 F.3d 581, 585 n.9 (5th Cir. 1995). We have reviewed
the record and the briefs of the parties and uphold the district
court’s determination that there was no Speedy Trial Act
violation.
AFFIRMED.