From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U. S. v. Thomas

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jun 3, 2010
435 F. App'x 311 (5th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 08-41090 Summary Calendar.

June 3, 2010.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98-CR-14-27.

Before DAVIS, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.


Nathaniel Howard Thomas, federal prisoner # 07052-078, appeals the district court's judgment of October 6, 2008, denying his motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on U.S.S.G. App. C, Amendment 591 (Nov. 2000). Thomas argues that, in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), the district court was authorized to consider the reduced offense level under the amendment and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors in considering the motion. This issue is foreclosed by this court's decisions in United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 236-39 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 517 (2009), and United States v. Evans, 587 F. 3d 667, 670-71 (5th Cir. 2009), petition for cert. filed (Jan. 28, 2010) (No. 09-8939).

On appeal, Thomas does not address the denial of relief based on the specific provisions of Amendment 591. When an appellant fails to identify any error in the district court's analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not appealed that issue. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Arguments must be briefed in order to be preserved. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1983). Any claim based on Amendment 591 must be deemed abandoned. See Brinkmann, 813 F.2d at 748.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government's motions are DENIED.


Summaries of

U. S. v. Thomas

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jun 3, 2010
435 F. App'x 311 (5th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

U. S. v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. NATHANIEL HOWARD THOMAS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jun 3, 2010

Citations

435 F. App'x 311 (5th Cir. 2010)