United States v. Nathaniel Craig Thompson, 940 F.2d 654, 4th Cir. (1991)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUnited States v. Nathaniel Craig Thompson, 940 F.2d 654, 4th Cir. (1991)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government Docs940 F.
2d 654
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of
unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Nathaniel Craig THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 90-5101.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 29, 1991.
Decided July 26, 1991.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of
North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Chief District Judge. (CR90-50-C)
Charles G. Monnett, III, Monnett & Caudle, Charlotte, N.C., for appellant.
Thomas J. Ashcraft, United States Attorney, Kenneth D. Bell, Assistant
United States Attorney, Charlotte, N.C., for appellee.
W.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before K.K. HALL, SPROUSE and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Nathaniel Craig Thompson appeals the sentence he received after his guilty
plea to conspiracy to distribute over fifty grams of cocaine base (21 U.S.C. Sec.
846). We affirm.
2
Thompson contends that the district court's upward departure from the
mandatory minimum sentence was unreasonable and that he was denied due
process and placed in jeopardy twice for one offense in that the district court
considered pending state drug charges against him. Thompson waived these
issues by failing to raise them in the district court. See United States v. Holguin,
868 F.2d 201, 205 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 58 U.S.L.W. 3214 (U.S.1989).
Therefore, they are not properly before this Court. In addition, after a review of
the record we cannot say that the departure constituted plain error.
Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(b).
The sentence imposed by the district court is accordingly affirmed. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
