USA v. Williams

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [08-11190 Affirmed] Judge: TMR , Judge: JLD , Judge: EBC. Mandate pull date is 12/06/2010 [08-11190]

USA v. Williams

Case: 08-11190 Document: 00511293188 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Doc. 0

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 08-11190 S u m m a r y Calendar November 15, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

U N IT E D STATES OF AMERICA, P la in t if f -A p p e lle e v. M I C H A E L LAWRENCE WILLIAMS, D e fe n d a n t -A p p e lla n t

A p p e a l from the United States District Court fo r the Northern District of Texas U S D C No. 5:06-CR-30-ALL

B e fo r e REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* M ic h a e l Lawrence Williams, federal prisoner # 34595-177, pleaded guilty in 2006 to distribution and possession with the intent to distribute more than 50 g r a m s of a mixture containing cocaine base ("crack"), and he was sentenced to 2 3 5 months of imprisonment. Williams filed a motion under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) seeking a reduction in his sentence based on a retroactive a m e n d m e n t to the Sentencing Guidelines that applied to crack offenses. He now a p p e a ls the district court's denial of that motion.
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
*

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 08-11190 Document: 00511293188 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/15/2010 No. 08-11190 W illia m s argues that the district court erred by failing to appoint counsel t o represent him during his § 3582(c)(2) proceeding. Williams did not request c o u n s e l or object regarding appointment of counsel in the district court. Therefore, his argument is reviewed for plain error. United States v. Whitfield, 5 9 0 F.3d 325, 347 n.15 (5th Cir. 2009) ("[G]enerally speaking, the plain error r u le is invoked when an appellant raises an issue on appeal that he failed to p r e s e r v e in the court below."), cert. denied, 2010 WL 2151025 (2010) (No. 091 1 0 6 7 ). T h e district court did not plainly err by not sua sponte appointing counsel fo r Williams. See United States v. Whitebird, 55 F.3d 1007, 1010-11 (5th Cir. 1 9 9 5 ). AFFIRMED.

2