United States v. Wilks

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 19, 2003
Docket02-50231
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Wilks (United States v. Wilks) 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. Wilks, (5th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-50231 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LARRY RICHARD WILKS, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. P-01-CR-357-2 -------------------- February 18, 2003

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Larry Richard Wilks, Jr. (“Wilks”) appeals the sentencing

following his guilty plea conviction for possession with the

intent to distribute methamphetamine. Wilks argues that the

district court erred in not reducing his base offense level by

five levels after determining that he was entitled to a safety

valve adjustment and a U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 downward departure. This

court reviews the district court’s application of the Sentencing

Guidelines is de novo. United States v. Charles, 301 F.3d 309,

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 02-50231 -2-

312-13 (5th Cir. 2002) (en banc). If the oral sentence is

ambiguous, this court will look to the written judgment to

determine the intent of the district court. Schurmann v. United

States, 658 F.2d 389, 390-91 (5th Cir. 1981).

The record indicates that the district court determined that

Wilks’ total offense level was 22 after granting the Government’s

motion for a downward departure, and that Wilks was sentenced

within the guideline range. Consequently, the district court did

not err in sentencing Wilks.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

United States v. Charles
301 F.3d 309 (Fifth Circuit, 2002)
Arman A. Schurmann v. United States
658 F.2d 389 (Fifth Circuit, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Wilks, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-wilks-ca5-2003.