United States v. Nalima
This text of United States v. Nalima (United States v. Nalima) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-11181 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GEOFFREY NALIMA,
Defendant-Appellant.
------------------------------------------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CR-71-1-R -------------------------------------------------------- April 11, 2002
Before JOLLY, WIENER and STEWART, Circuit Judges:
PER CURIAM:*
Geoffrey Nalima, federal prisoner # 51415-019, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion
to correct his sentence pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 35 and 36. He contends that the district court
erred in that restitution cannot be ordered for losses occurring before the period alleged in the
indictment, that restitution cannot be ordered for victims not named in the indictment, and that
restitution cannot be based on relevant conduct.
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. None of the conditions for granting relief under Rule 35 are present. See United States v.
Early, 27 F.3d 140-42 (5th Cir. 1994). Because the district court was without jurisdiction to grant
relief, the court’s denial was not a gross abuse of discretion. See United States v. Sinclair, 1 F.3d 329
(5th Cir. 1993).
Similarly, Nalima’s reliance on FED. R. CRIM. P. 36 is misplaced. The district court did not
err in denying the motion as Nalima does not seek to correct a clerical mistake in the judgment of
conviction but instead seeks substantive relief unavailable under Rule 36. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36;
United States v. Massey, 827 F.2d 995, 1005 n.1 (5th Cir. 1987). The district court’s denial of
Nalima’s motion pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 35 and 36 is AFFIRMED.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Nalima, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-nalima-ca5-2002.