Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-16-10356/USCOURTS-ca5-16-10356-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Marcia Caraway Morrison
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-10356

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARCIA CARAWAY MORRISON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:15-CR-224-1

Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Marcia Caraway Morrison appeals her 70-month prison sentence for 

wire fraud. She challenges the district court’s denial of a reduction of her 

offense level for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. Our 

review is even more deferential than review for clear error, and we will affirm 

the district court’s decision unless it is without foundation. United States v. 

Solis, 299 F.3d 420, 458 (5th Cir. 2002).

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 13, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-10356 Document: 00513872540 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/13/2017
No. 16-10356

2

At her rearraignment, Morrison stated under oath that a written 

summary of the facts supporting her guilty plea was true and correct. The 

summary stated that Morrison transferred $50,000 from a bank account 

without the owner’s knowledge or consent. The information to which Morrison 

pleaded guilty identified this $50,000 transfer as the basis for the wire fraud 

count. 

During a presentence interview, however, Morrison stated that the 

$50,000 was a loan. Morrison thus denied conduct comprising the offense of 

conviction. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment. (n.1(A)); United States v. Galban, 

No. 93-3844, 1994 WL 399501, at *1 (5th Cir. July 22, 1994) (unpublished); see 

also 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.3 (unpublished opinions issue before 1996 are precedent). 

The district court’s ruling was not without foundation. See Solis, 299 F.3d at

458.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 16-10356 Document: 00513872540 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/13/2017