United States v. Mark George

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 25, 2020
Docket19-10741
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Mark George (United States v. Mark George) 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. Mark George, (5th Cir. 2020).

Opinion

Case: 19-10741 Document: 00515579831 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/25/2020

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED September 25, 2020 No. 19-10741 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Mark Anthony George, also known as Mark George,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:19-CR-8-1

Before Owen, Chief Judge, and Haynes and Costa, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Mark Anthony George was convicted of possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and escape from custody, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 751(a), and sentenced within the advisory guidelines range to 30 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 19-10741 Document: 00515579831 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/25/2020

No. 19-10741

release. On appeal, he contends that the “shall-not-frequent” condition set out in the judgment should be removed because it conflicts with the oral pronouncement of sentence. After George appealed, the Government filed an unopposed motion to remand the case to the district court for correction of the judgment. The motion was granted, and the district court corrected the judgment to, relevant here, exclude the “shall-not-frequent” supervised release condition. As this is the sole relief that George seeks, the appeal is DISMISSED as moot. See United States v. Clark, 193 F.3d 845, 847-48 (5th Cir. 1999); United States v. Shartzer, 705 F. App’x 265, 271 (5th Cir. 2017).

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

Related

United States v. Clark
193 F.3d 845 (Fifth Circuit, 1999)
United States v. Ryan Shartzer
705 F. App'x 265 (Fifth Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Mark George, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mark-george-ca5-2020.