United States v. Marcia Morrison, 676 F. App'x 342 (5th Cir. 2017). · Go Syfert
United States v. Marcia Morrison, 676 F. App'x 342 (5th Cir. 2017). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
Marcia Caraway MORRISON, Defendant-Appellant
16-10356.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Feb 13, 2017.
Unpublished opinion
676 F. App'x 342
Stephen P. Fahey, Esq., James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee, Charles Baruch, Johnston Tobey Baruch, Dallas, TX, Paul Gary Belew, Jensen, Belew & Gonzalez, P.L.L.C., Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant
Benavides, Dennis, Per Curiam, Prado.
Unpublished  |  Direct Criminal
PER CURIAM: *

Marcia Caraway Morrison appeals her 70-month prison sentence for wire fraud. She challenges the district court’s denial of a reduction of her offense level for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. Our review is even more deferential than review for clear error, and we will affirm the district court’s decision unless it is without foundation. United States v. Solis, 299 F.3d 420, 458 (5th Cir. 2002).

At her rearraignment, Morrison stated under oath that a written summary of the facts supporting her guilty plea was true and correct. The summary stated that Morrison transferred $50,000 from a bank account without the owner’s knowledge or consent. The information to which Morrison pleaded guilty identified this $50,000 transfer as the basis for the wire fraud count.

During a presentence interview,, however, Morrison stated that the $50,000 was a loan. Morrison thus denied conduct comprising the offense of conviction. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment. (n.l(A)); Unit [*343] ed States v. Galban, No. 93-3844, 1994 WL 399501, at *1 (5th Cir. July 22, 1994) (unpublished); see also 5th Cir. R. 47.5.3 (unpublished opinions issue before 1996 are precedent). The district court’s ruling was not without foundation. See Solis, 299 F.3d at 458.

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.