Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Johnson, 01-30708 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 01-30708 Visitors: 18
Filed: Apr. 12, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-30708 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANDREW CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 00-CR-10002-3 - - - - - - - - - - April 11, 2002 Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Andrew Christopher Johnson appeals his sentence for unlawful use of a communicati
More
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                            No. 01-30708
                        Conference Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                          Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus

ANDREW CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON,

                                          Defendant-Appellant.

                          - - - - - - - - - -
            Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Louisiana
                        USDC No. 00-CR-10002-3
                          - - - - - - - - - -
                             April 11, 2002

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Andrew Christopher Johnson appeals his sentence for unlawful

use of a communication facility in violation of 21 U.S.C.

ยง 843(b).   He argues that his sentence should be vacated because

the $20,000 fine imposed by the district court is excessive.

     Johnson did not raise this issue before the district court.

Therefore, we review for plain error.    United States v.

Rodriguez, 
15 F.3d 408
, 414-15 (5th Cir. 1994).   We do not find

that plain error has been established.    See United States v.

Altamirano, 
11 F.3d 52
, 53 (5th Cir. 1993); United States v.

Matovsky, 
935 F.2d 719
, 722-23 (5th Cir. 1991).


     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-30708
                 -2-

AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer