Case ID: f-appx_205/html/0233-01.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. Frank Lafayette BIRD, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-20183
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 9, 2006.
    James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Frank Lafayette Bird, Jr., raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Bird, 401 F.3d 633, 634 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 150, 163 L.Ed.2d 148 (2005), which held that the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act is a valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause even after the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, 120 S.Ct. 1740,146 L.Ed.2d 658 (2000), and by United States v. Matthews, 312 F.3d 652, 657 (5th Cir.2002), which held that under the law of the case doctrine, an issue of fact or law decided on appeal may not be reexamined by the appellate court on a subsequent appeal. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.