Court Opinion

ID: 18286
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 07:12:58+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:46.609565
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         For the Fifth Circuit

                     ___________________________

                             No. 98-30495
                     ___________________________

                      UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                VERSUS

                  MICHAEL SHORT, also known as Nate,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant.

       ___________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
               For the Eastern District of Louisiana
        ___________________________________________________
                          August 11, 1999

                 ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING
     (Opinion July 15, 1999, 5th Cir., 1999, _____F.3d____)

Before POLITZ, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

     Defendant-Appellant Michael Short asks for panel rehearing

because our prior opinion did not specifically discuss his twelfth

point of error.

     Short’s twelfth point of error is that his indictment was

insufficient as to Counts 1 and 2 because it failed to specify when

the drug conspiracy and continuing criminal enterprise began.      But

Short raised this issue for the first time on appeal and does not

assert specific prejudice or a miscarriage of justice resulting

from the alleged defect in the indictment.         Therefore, under a

plain error standard of review, Short’s argument must fail.

     Short’s Petition for Panel Rehearing is therefore DENIED.