Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry WHITE, also known as 187, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-27
Citations: 243 F. App'x 829
Docket Number: No. 06-11242
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry WHITE, also known as 187, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 243
Pages: 829–830

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry WHITE, also known as 187, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-11242
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 27, 2007.
J. Michael Worley, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Timmie Ray White, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DEMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Larry White appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction of distribution of cocaine base. White was sentenced to 120 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release.
White asserts that the district court erred in its determination of the quantity of drugs attributable to his offense. The Government has moved for summary affirmance on the ground that White has waived his sole issue on appeal. Alternatively, the Government seeks an extension of time to file a brief.
Prior to sentencing, White objected to the presentence report, raising the same issue he presents on appeal. White, however, withdrew his objection at his sentencing hearing. "[Wlaiver is the 'intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right.' " United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938)). The withdrawal of an objection constitutes the waiver of the objection by the defendant. United States v. Musquiz, 45 F.3d 927, 931 (5th Cir.1995). Accordingly, White's challenge to the district court's determination of drug quantity is unreviewable.
The Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, its alternative request for an extension of time is DE NIED as unnecessary, and the decision of the district court is 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.