United States v. White

06-11242Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitJun 27, 2007

Full text

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
June 27, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-11242
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LARRY WHITE, also known as 187,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:06-CR-77-ALL
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Larry White appeals the sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction of distribution of cocaine base. White
was sentenced to 120 months of imprisonment and three years of
supervised release.
White asserts that the district court erred in its
determination of the quantity of drugs attributable to his
offense. The Government has moved for summary affirmance on the
ground that White has waived his sole issue on appeal.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 06-11242
-2-
Alternatively, the Government seeks an extension of time to file
a brief.
Prior to sentencing, White objected to the presentence
report, raising the same issue he presents on appeal. White,
however, withdrew his objection at his sentencing hearing.
“[W]aiver is the ‘intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a
known right.’” United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733 (1993)
(quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 (1938)). The
withdrawal of an objection constitutes the waiver of the
objection by the defendant. United States v. Musquiz, 45 F.3d
927, 931 (5th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, White’s challenge to the
district court’s determination of drug quantity is unreviewable.
The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED,
its alternative request for an extension of time is DENIED as
unnecessary, and the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.