Case ID: f-appx_122/html/0169-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lionel MOORE, also known as Doc, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04 — 40127.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided Feb. 28, 2005.
    James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, David Hill Peck, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Lionel Moore, Federal Correctional Institution Beaumont, Beaumont, TX, pro se.
    Before WIENER, BENAVIDES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Lionel Moore entered a guilty plea in 1999 to charges of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base and possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of 135 months of imprisonment and concurrent terms of five years of supervised release. We affirmed Moore’s convictions and sentences in all aspects except the five-year terms of supervised release. United States v. Moore, No. 00-40602 at 1, 2001 WL 1692476, 4 (5th Cir. Nov. 27, 2001). On remand, in accordance with this court’s mandate, the district court sentenced Moore to concurrent terms of three years of supervised release.

Moore challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Review of this issue is precluded under the law of the case doctrine, and we will not reexamine it. United States v. Lee, 358 F.3d 315, 320 (5th Cir.2004). Insofar as Moore seeks to appeal separately the district court’s denial of his post judgment motion to withdraw his guilty plea, the motion lacked a jurisdictional basis. See Fed.R.CrimP. 11(e); Fed.R.CrimP. 32(e) (2002). Moore’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.