USA v. Gregory Neal


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-50654 Affirmed ] Judge: JLW , Judge: PRO , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 05/12/2014 [13-50654]

Download PDF
Case: 13-50654 Document: 00512603024 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 13-50654 Summary Calendar FILED April 21, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. GREGORY EUGENE NEAL, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:10-CR-511-1 Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Gregory Eugene Neal appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to reduce the 60-month sentence imposed on his guilty plea conviction for possessing with intent to distribute five grams or more of crack cocaine. See 18 U.S.C § 3582(c). In United States v. Neal, No. 11-50110, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 23943 *1 (5th Cir. Nov. 20, 2012) (unpublished), issued on remand from the Supreme Court, 133 S. Ct. 157(2012), after its decision in Dorsey v. United Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-50654 Document: 00512603024 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2014 No. 13-50654 States, 132 S. Ct. 2321, 2329-35 (2012), we affirmed the 60-month sentence on the basis that the sentence had been based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and was reasonable. See United States v. Bueno, 585 F.3d 847, 850 n.3 (5th Cir. 2009). Neal’s challenge under Dorsey to the 60-month sentence is therefore barred by the law of the case doctrine, which “precludes reexamination by the appellate court on a subsequent appeal of an issue of law or fact decided on a previous appeal.” United States v. Agofsky, 516 F.3d 280, 283 (5th Cir. 2008); White v. Murtha, 377 F.2d 428, 431-32 (5th Cir. 1967). 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?