Filed: Oct. 05, 2006
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-51486 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus FLORENTINO MARTINEZ-RIOS, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-80-ALL - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgme
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-51486 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus FLORENTINO MARTINEZ-RIOS, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-80-ALL - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgmen..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-51486
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FLORENTINO MARTINEZ-RIOS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:04-CR-80-ALL
--------------------
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Florentino
Martinez-Rios raises arguments that are foreclosed by United
States v. Daugherty,
264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001), which
rejected a Commerce Clause challenge to the
felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g).
The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and
the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.