Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Maurice Thomas POINDEXTER, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-12-01
Citations: 81 F. App'x 625
Docket Number: No. 03-1968
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Maurice Thomas POINDEXTER, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 81
Pages: 625–626

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Maurice Thomas POINDEXTER, Appellant.
No. 03-1968.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 7, 2003.
Decided Dec. 1, 2003.
Thomas Joseph Mehan, U.S. Attorney’s Office, St. Louis, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Brian S. Witherspoon, Federal Public Defender’s Office, St. Louis, MO, for Defendant-Appellant.
Maurice Thomas Poindexter, pro se, St. Louis, MO, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before BYE, BOWMAN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
After a bench trial, Maurice Poindexter was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Poindexter requested that his federal sentence be ordered to run concurrently with his undischarged state probation-revocation sentence. Rejecting that request, the district court imposed a 120-month prison term to run consecutively to his state sentence, plus 3 years supervised release. Poindexter appeals.
Upon de novo review, see United States v. Ashley, 342 F.3d 850, 852 (8th Cir.2003), we affirm the sentence imposed by the district court, see United States v. Smith, 282 F.3d 1045, 1047-48 (8th Cir.2002) (U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3, comment.(n.6) is binding on federal sentencing courts and mandates that sentence imposed on defendant for crime committed during probation must run consecutively to any resulting sentence for probation revocation).
. The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.