United States v. Beman

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 26, 2001
Docket00-51322
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Beman (United States v. Beman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Beman, (5th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-51322 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DUNOIS DEE T. BEMAN,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. MO-98-CR-2-2 - - - - - - - - - - October 26, 2001

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Dunois “Dee” T. Beman appeals from his sentence following

resentencing for conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine and

aiding and abetting the manufacture of methamphetamine. He

argues that his sentence is invalid pursuant to Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), because it was based upon the

district court’s determination of drug quantity and such quantity

was neither submitted to a jury nor found beyond a reasonable

doubt.

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 00-51322 -2-

This court has declined to apply Apprendi when a sentence is

enhanced within the statutory range based upon a drug-quantity

finding. United States v. Keith, 230 F.3d 784, 787 (5th Cir.

2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1163 (2001); United States v.

Doggett, 230 F.3d 160, 166 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S.

Ct. 1152 (2001); United States v. Meshack, 225 F.3d 556, 575-77

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied sub nom., Parker v. United States,

531 U.S. 1100 (2001), amended on reh’g, 244 F.3d 367 (5th Cir.

2001). Beman concedes that his sole argument on appeal is

foreclosed by this court’s precedent, but he urges this court to

reconsider the issue.

The above-cited cases are binding on this court. See United

States v. Ruff, 984 F.2d 635, 640 (5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly,

the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Doggett
230 F.3d 160 (Fifth Circuit, 2000)
United States v. Keith
230 F.3d 784 (Fifth Circuit, 2000)
Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (Supreme Court, 2000)
Parker v. United States
531 U.S. 1100 (Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Beman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-beman-ca5-2001.