Case ID: f-appx_280/html/0387-02.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. Michael Wayne PARRISH, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-11311
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    June 4, 2008.
    Jeffrey Robert Haag, U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Helen Miller Liggett, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Michael Wayne Parrish raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 119 (5th Cir.2005), which held that a defendant is not entitled to a jury trial to determine whether the terms of supervised release have been violated. 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.