Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-09-40910/USCOURTS-ca5-09-40910-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Rogelio Garza
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-40910

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

ROGELIO GARZA,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:06-CR-959-1

Before WIENER, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Rogelio Garza appeals the district court’s judgment revoking his

supervised release and sentencing him to serve twenty-four months in prison.

According to Garza, the district court erred by concluding that he had committed

a new offense and by using this finding both to cancel his release and as a basis

for his sentence. Under Garza’s view, the evidence adduced at the revocation

hearing did not establish his commission of a new, marijuana-related offense.

The abuse of discretion standard applies to our review of the district court’s

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

July 19, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

 Case: 09-40910 Document: 00511177911 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/19/2010
No. 09-40910

decision to rescind Garza’s release. See United States v. McCormick, 54 F.3d

214, 219 (5th Cir. 1995).

We disagree with Garza’s arguments. Our review of the record shows no

error in connection with the district court’s conclusion that Garza committed the

new offense alleged in the Petition For Warrant or Summons because the

evidence adduced at the revocation hearing sufficed to show that it was more

likely than not that Garza committed the disputed offense. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 3583(e)(3); see also United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 117-18 (5th Cir.

2005); United States v. Barksdale-Contreras, 972 F.2d 111, 115 (5th Cir. 1992).

Because the district court’s conclusion concerning Garza’s commission of the new

offense was not erroneous, its use of this conclusion to revoke his release and

sentence him likewise was not erroneous.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 09-40910 Document: 00511177911 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/19/2010