Filed: Dec. 12, 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 December 12, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 06-30219 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JASON RAKEL, also known as Jason David Rakel, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:05-CR-50079-2 - Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jason Rakel
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 12, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 06-30219 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JASON RAKEL, also known as Jason David Rakel, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:05-CR-50079-2 - Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jason Rakel a..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 12, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
No. 06-30219 Clerk
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JASON RAKEL, also known as Jason David Rakel,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 5:05-CR-50079-2
--------------------
Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jason Rakel appeals his conviction for conspiracy to
distribute methamphetamine. For the first time on appeal, he
argues that his guilty plea was not supported by a sufficient
factual basis. We hold that Rakel’s admitted purchase of 70.7
grams of methamphetamine in a two-week period is indicative of
distribution, not personal use. Consequently, the district court
did not plainly err in accepting his plea. See United States v.
Palmer,
456 F.3d 484, 489, 492 (5th Cir. 2006).
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.