United States v. Kindley, 07-10732 (2008)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 07-10732
Visitors: 57
Filed: Mar. 27, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 27, 2008 No. 07-10732 Summary Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. KIMBERLY NEWELL KINDLEY Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-36-2 Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Kimberly Newell Kindley appeals the district court’s decisio
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 27, 2008 No. 07-10732 Summary Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. KIMBERLY NEWELL KINDLEY Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-36-2 Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Kimberly Newell Kindley appeals the district court’s decision..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
March 27, 2008
No. 07-10732
Summary Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
KIMBERLY NEWELL KINDLEY
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:04-CR-36-2
Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kimberly Newell Kindley appeals the district court’s decision to revoke her
term of supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(g). She argues that the district
court erred in finding that it could not impose substance-abuse treatment
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) in lieu of incarceration. Kindley committed
several violations of the conditions of her supervised release. Failure of a drug
*
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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 07-10732
test was but one of those violations. Accordingly, there was no error in the
district court’s revocation of supervised release and imposition of a term of
imprisonment. See United States v. Harper, 34 Fed. App’x 150 (5th Cir. 2002);1
5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
AFFIRMED.
1
Although an unpublished opinion issued after January 1, 1996 is not
controlling precedent, it may be considered as persuasive authority. See Ballard
v. Burton,
444 F.3d 391, 401 & n.7 (5th Cir. 2006) (citing 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.).
2
Source: CourtListener