Case ID: f-appx_108/html/0981-01.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. David KRAMER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-41435.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided Sept. 21, 2004.
    Tracey M. Batson, Assistant Us Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Texas, Plano, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Franklyn Ray Mickelsen, Jr., Broden & Mickelsen, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before DAVIS, SMITH, DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

David Kramer was convicted by a jury of making false statements to a government agent. He argues that the district court’s charge to the jury to continue deliberations in an effort to reach a verdict was an impermissible abbreviated Allen charge and that the court erred in failing to notify counsel of its intention to give the charge.

Giving Kramer the benefit of the doubt that the court did not confer with counsel prior to giving the supplemental charge, the court’s failure to consult with counsel was error. However, any error was harmless. United States v. McDuffie, 542 F.2d 236, 241 (5th Cir.1976). The district court’s charge to the jury to continue deliberations was not an abuse of discretion, and Kramer’s challenge with respect to the charge is without merit. See United States v. Warren, 594 F.2d 1046, 1050 (5th Cir.1979); United States v. Straach, 987 F.2d 232, 242 (5th Cir.1993). The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     
      
      
        See Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492, 17 S.Ct. 154, 41 L.Ed. 528 (1896).