Court Opinion

ID: 8203
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 05:35:15+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:04:42.921419
License: Public Domain

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                        FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                        _____________________

                             No. 95-40132
                           Summary Calendar
                        _____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                Plaintiff-Appellee,

                               versus

RUSSELL KENTON COLEMAN,

                                                Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

      Appeal from the United States District Court for the
                    Eastern District of Texas
                      USDC No. 1:94-CR-57-1
_________________________________________________________________
                        November 28, 1995

Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     The appellant appeals from a judgment of conviction on five

firearms counts.    He argues that his confession was not voluntary,

that his confession was not corroborated, and that he should have

been permitted to put on a "mistake of law" defense.

     The district court did not err in holding the confession to be

voluntary.     See United States v. Scurlock, 52 F.3d 531, 536 (5th

     *
     Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that
have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on
the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless
expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession."
Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion
should not be published.
Cir. 1995).   Adequate corroboration is in the record.   See United

States v. Crawford, 52 F.3d 1303, 1309 (5th Cir. 1995); United

States v. Devoll, 39 F.3d 575, 581 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied,

115 S.Ct. 1701 (1995).   "Mistake of law" is no defense.    United

States v. Merkt, 764 F.2d 266, 273 (5th Cir. 1985).

                                                  A F F I R M E D.

                                -2-