United States v. James Phillips

668 F. App'x 95
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedAugust 17, 2016
Docket15-30807 Summary Calendar
StatusUnpublished

This text of 668 F. App'x 95 (United States v. James Phillips) 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. James Phillips, 668 F. App'x 95 (5th Cir. 2016).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

James Phillips appeals his conviction for interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle and sentence of 110 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress statements he made to law enforcement following his arrest and the reasonableness of his sentence.

Any unlawful delay in Phillips’s presentment to a state court judge does not provide an independent basis for suppression. See United States v. Martin, 431 F.3d 846, 848-49 (5th Cir. 2005). Phillips had no right to be presented to a federal court judge when he made his statements. See Barnett v. United States, 384 F.2d 848, 858 (5th Cir. 1967). The totality of the circumstances supports the district court’s conclusion that Phillips’s statements were voluntary. See United States v. Anderson, 755 F.3d 782, 790 (5th Cir. 2014).

Phillips fails to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that applies to his within-guidelines sentence. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir. 2008). Any claim of a procedural sentencing error based on the sentence enhancement for being an organizer or leader is waived by virtue of inadequate briefing. Cf. United States v. Reagan, 596 F.3d 251, 254 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Stalnaker, 571 F.3d 428, 439-40 (5th Cir. 2009).

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

United States v. Martin
431 F.3d 846 (Fifth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Campos-Maldonado
531 F.3d 337 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)
United States v. Stalnaker
571 F.3d 428 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Cooks
589 F.3d 173 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Reagan
596 F.3d 251 (Fifth Circuit, 2010)
United States v. Joseph Anderson
755 F.3d 782 (Fifth Circuit, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
668 F. App'x 95, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-james-phillips-ca5-2016.