Court Opinion

ID: 31999
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 18:48:26+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:47:22.852797
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS               July 16, 2003
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                        ____________________             Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                 Clerk
                             02-20837
                       ____________________

                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee,

                              versus

                          IRAJ MAHMOUDI,

                                             Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                         (H-01-CR-587-ALL)
_________________________________________________________________

Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and BARKSDALE, Circuit
Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Iraj Mahmoudi appeals his convictions for unlawful procurement

of citizenship, 18 U.S.C. § 1425(b), and making a false statement

to a federal agency, 18 U.S.C. § 1001.     He contends: the evidence

was insufficient to convict him of either charge; 8 C.F.R. §

316.10, which defines a term in § 1425(b), violates the separation-

of-powers doctrine; and the district court erred by denying his

motion to suppress evidence seized from his apartment.

     *
      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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
     Having   heard   oral   argument   and   reviewed   the    briefs   and

pertinent parts of the record, we conclude there was no error. The

judgment is

                                                               AFFIRMED.

                                   2