Filed: Feb. 18, 2009
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 February 18, 2009 No. 08-50161 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. DAVID ERIC GARCIA Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:99-CR-22-1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* David Eric Garcia appeals from three consecutive sent
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 18, 2009 No. 08-50161 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. DAVID ERIC GARCIA Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:99-CR-22-1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* David Eric Garcia appeals from three consecutive sente..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
February 18, 2009
No. 08-50161
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
DAVID ERIC GARCIA
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 5:99-CR-22-1
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
David Eric Garcia appeals from three consecutive sentences of 24 months
of imprisonment imposed following revocation of his supervised release. He
argues that the district court lacked the authority to order that his federal
sentences run consecutively to an as-yet-unimposed state sentence. He
concedes, however, that this argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Brown,
920 F.2d 1212, 1216-17 (5th Cir. 1991), abrogated on other grounds, United
States v. Candia,
454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.