Case ID: f-appx_268/html/0312-01.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. Barry K. BARNETT, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-10832
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    March 5, 2008.
    John S. Bradford, Stockwell, Sievert, Yiccellio, Clements & Shaddock, Lake Charles, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Raymond J. Rodgers, Federal Public Defender’s Office Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before KING, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Barry K. Barnett 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.