United States v. Newsome

144 F. App'x 446
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Newsome. Read the opinion of the Court — 89 F. App'x 466
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 11, 2005·No. 03-20465·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Leslie Ray Newsome (Newsome) appeals his sentence for possession with the intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base following the revocation of his supervised release. Newsome argues that at *447 the sentencing following the revocation of his supervised release, the district court expressly directed that his supervised release would be “on the same terms as we had before.” Newsome further argues that neither the previous supervision order nor the court’s oral pronouncement prohibited him from possessing a dangerous weapon. Newsome argues that the condition barring his possession of “any other dangerous weapon” must be stricken from the written judgment because it conflicts with the sentence orally pronounced by the district court.

For the reasons outlined in United States v. Torres-Aguilar, 352 F.3d 934, 937-38 (5th Cir.2003), we conclude that the district court’s omission of the dangerous weapon prohibition during the oral pronouncement of sentence did not create a conflict with the sentence set forth in the judgment.

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

United States v. Newsome, 144 F. App'x 446 (5th Cir. 2005).

144 F. App'x 446 (United States v. Newsome) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Torres-Aguilar
352 F.3d 934 (Fifth Circuit, 2004)