USA v. Wormly
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
No. 08-50304 Summary Calendar April 8, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus APRIL WORMLY, Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 5:07-CR-533-ALL
Before SMITH, STEWART, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:*
April Wormly pleaded guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1038(a)(1) by making telephone calls stating that there was a bomb on an aircraft. She contends 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
No. 08-50304 district court erred in failing to order a competency examination sua sponte and in failing to convene a competency hearing. A review of the record reveals that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to conduct a more searching competence inquiry. See United States v. Messervey, 317 F.3d 457, 463 (5th Cir. 2002); United States v. Davis, 61 F.3d 291, 304 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. Williams, 819 F.2d 605, 607 (5th Cir. 1987); United States v. Horovitz, 584 F.2d 682, 683 n.3 (5th Cir. 1978). Wormly avers that the district court erred in imposing sentence without the benefit of a formal presentence investigation report. In her plea agreement, Wormly waived the right to assert this issue on appeal. See United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 567-68 (5th Cir. 1992). AFFIRMED.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?