Filed: Jun. 16, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-51088 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PATRICIA ANN SHAW, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-88-CR-10-2 W-97-CA-122 - - - - - - - - - - June 15, 1999 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Patricia Ann Shaw, federal prisoner # 40010-080, has filed a motion for
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-51088 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PATRICIA ANN SHAW, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-88-CR-10-2 W-97-CA-122 - - - - - - - - - - June 15, 1999 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Patricia Ann Shaw, federal prisoner # 40010-080, has filed a motion for ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-51088
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PATRICIA ANN SHAW,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-88-CR-10-2
W-97-CA-122
- - - - - - - - - -
June 15, 1999
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Patricia Ann Shaw, federal prisoner # 40010-080, has filed a
motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in the
appeal of the district court’s order denying her motion to
correct her sentence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) as an attempt
to circumvent the requirements for successive motions under 28
U.S.C. § 2255. Shaw cannot show that the district court erred.
See United States v. Rich,
141 F.3d 550, 551 (5th Cir. 1998).
Because Shaw’s appeal does not present a nonfrivolous issue, her
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 98-51088
-2-
motion to proceed IFP is DENIED and her appeal is DISMISSED as
frivolous pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 42.2. See Howard v. King,
707
F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).
MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.