United States v. Richey

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 5, 2001
Docket99-41405
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Richey (United States v. Richey) 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. Richey, (5th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-41405 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TIMOTHY WAYNE RICHEY, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:99-CR-59

February 5, 2001

Before POLITZ, JOLLY, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Timothy Wayne Richey appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to a single

count of receiving a sexually explicit depiction of a minor. He contends that the

* 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. district court erred in assessing a four-level increase under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(3)

because the four images offered by the Government to support the increase, which

depicted anal penetration of very young minors by adult males, did not portray

sadistic or masochistic conduct or other depictions of violence. This argument is

foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Lyckman,1

Richey also contends that there was no evidence establishing his intent to

possess pictures portraying sadistic or masochistic conduct or other depictions of

violence. That contention also is meritless in light of unrebutted statements in the

PSR reflecting that Richey had downloaded several images of minors engaged in

sexually explicit conduct, including the four images offered by the Government at

sentencing, from an Internet news group.2

The judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.

1 ___ F. 3d ___ (5th Cir. Dec. 7, 2000, No. 99-40982), 2000 WL 1800131 at *2-*4. 2 United States v. Kimbrough, 69 F.3d 723, 734 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. Mir, 919 F.2d 940, 943 (5th Cir. 1990). 2

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

Related

United States v. Lyckman
235 F.3d 234 (Fifth Circuit, 2000)
United States v. Armando Mir
919 F.2d 940 (Fifth Circuit, 1990)
United States v. Terry Burton Kimbrough
69 F.3d 723 (Fifth Circuit, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Richey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-richey-ca5-2001.