Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Vance ROOKS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-14
Citations: 217 F. App'x 404
Docket Number: No. 06-30494
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Vance ROOKS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 217
Pages: 404–405

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Vance ROOKS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-30494
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 14, 2007.
James G. Cowles, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Daryl Gold, Shreveport, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We AFFIRM Rooks's convictions. The jury instruction properly stated the jury could find Rooks guilty of either receiving or distributing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2) because the statute is unambiguous and because "a disjunctive statute may be pleaded conjunctively and proved disjunctively." See United States v. Harrelson, 705 F.2d 733, 736 (5th Cir.1983). Furthermore, Rooks's receiving conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2) and his possession conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5) are neither multiplicitous nor violate the Fifth Amendment because they are different crimes: a person can possess child pornography he manufactured, and a person might no longer possess child pornography he once received. We also note that the two convictions were for different images of child pornography.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.