Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clarence Wayne ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-17
Citations: 87 F. App'x 380
Docket Number: No. 03-10369
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clarence Wayne ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 87
Pages: 380–381

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clarence Wayne ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-10369.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 17, 2004.
Linda Marie Dedman, US Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Robert Jackson Herrington, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Ira Raymond Kirkendoll, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Clarence Wayne Robinson was convicted after a jury trial of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), (b)(1)(C); possession of a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A); and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and 924(e). He appeals, arguing that the district court erred in ruling that he did not have standing to raise a Fourth Amendment challenge to the validity of the search of an apartment.
Although Robinson may have had a subjective expectation of privacy in the apartment, any such expectation was not one which society would recognize as reasonable. The district court did not err in ruling that Robinson did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the apartment.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
. See United States v. Gomez, 276 F.3d 694, 697 (5th Cir.2001); United States v. Ibarra, 948 F.2d 903, 906 (5th Cir.1991).