Case ID: f-appx_217/html/0373-01.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. Phillip Joseph CROW, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-11045
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 18, 2007.
    Paul E. Gartner, Jr., Nancy E. Larson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Raymond J. Rodgers, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Phillip Joseph Crow pleaded guilty to assault of a federal employee and using and carrying a firearm during a crime of violence. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 111(a)(1), 111(b), and 1114; 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). He appeals the sentence imposed for his assault offense. Crow asserts that a six-level enhancement to his offense level under U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(b) was improper because the enhancement was based on the district court’s clearly erroneous finding that Crow’s assault was motivated by the victim’s status as a government employee. Based on the record as a whole, such a finding was plausible and therefore not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Gonzales, 436 F.3d 560, 584 (5th Cir.2006).

Accordingly, 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.