USA v. Louis Cao


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [11-31018 Affirmed ] Judge: TMR , Judge: EHJ , Judge: ECP Mandate pull date is 10/25/2013 for Appellant Louis Cao [11-31018]

Download PDF
Case: 11-31018 Document: 00512397445 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/04/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 11-31018 Summary Calendar October 4, 2013 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. LOUIS CAO, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:08-CR-90-1 Before REAVLEY, JONES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Louis Cao pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute 3,4methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) and was sentenced to 151 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He argues that his sentence should be vacated and the case remanded so that the district court may conform the written judgment to its oral pronouncement by removing a special condition of supervision requiring him to participate in a mental health program and assist in the cost of the treatment. The Government asserts that there is no * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 11-31018 Document: 00512397445 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/04/2013 No. 11-31018 conflict between the written judgment and the oral pronouncement of sentence and that consideration of the issue is barred by a waiver provision in Cao’s plea agreement. It is unnecessary to address the waiver issue because the Government is correct that there is no conflict between the district court’s oral pronouncement and its written judgment. See United States v. Vega, 332 F.3d 849, 852 (5th Cir. 2003). AFFIRMED. 2

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?