United States v. Marcus Jones

308 F. App'x 23
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 8, 2009
Docket07-3229
StatusUnpublished

This text of 308 F. App'x 23 (United States v. Marcus Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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. Marcus Jones, 308 F. App'x 23 (8th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Marcus Jones appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 motion to correct his presentence report (PSR) to omit references to “crack.” We find that Jones’s *24 proposed change does not amount to a clerical error or an error arising from oversight or omission. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 36. Jones did not object to the PSR prior to sentencing, see United States v. Paz, 411 F.3d 906, 909 (8th Cir.2005) (facts in PSR are deemed admitted unless objected to), and there is overwhelming evidence that the drugs at issue were crack cocaine, see United States v. Jones, 275 F.3d 673, 676-78 (8th Cir.2001).

Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Jones’s motion for appellate counsel.

1

. The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

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

Related

United States v. Hector Diego Paz, Jr.
411 F.3d 906 (Eighth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Marcus Jones
275 F.3d 673 (Eighth Circuit, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
308 F. App'x 23, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-marcus-jones-ca8-2009.