Filed: Apr. 10, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-11184 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SHELBY LEE DANIELS, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:99-CR-98-1-T - April 10, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Shelby Lee Daniels, federal prisoner #22481-077, appeals the district court’s denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(2) moti
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-11184 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SHELBY LEE DANIELS, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:99-CR-98-1-T - April 10, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Shelby Lee Daniels, federal prisoner #22481-077, appeals the district court’s denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(2) motio..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11184
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SHELBY LEE DANIELS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:99-CR-98-1-T
--------------------
April 10, 2001
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Shelby Lee Daniels, federal prisoner #22481-077, appeals the
district court’s denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(2) motion
to dismiss the indictment, which was filed after Daniels had
noticed his appeal from his judgment of conviction. Daniels’
timely notice of appeal from his judgment of conviction divested
the district court of jurisdiction to address the Fed. R. Crim.
P. 12(b)(2) motion. See United States v. Hitchmon,
602 F.2d 689,
692 (5th Cir. 1979)(en banc). Accordingly, we AFFIRM the
district court’s denial of the motion to dismiss the indictment
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-11184
-2-
on the ground that the district court was without jurisdiction to
consider the motion.
AFFIRMED.