Unpublished Dispositionunited States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Patric L. Boles, Defendant-appellant, 871 F.2d 1089 (6th Cir. 1989)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - 871 F.2d 1089 (6th Cir. 1989) March 28, 1989

Before BOYCE F. MARTIN, Jr. and MILBURN, Circuit Judges, and JOHN D. HOLSCHUH, District Judge.* 

ORDER

This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the briefs and record, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).

Defendant Boles filed an action for reduction of sentence under Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b). The sentences were imposed when Boles plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to import a prohibited drug, 21 U.S.C. §§ 963, 952(a), and one count of making false declarations to a grand jury, 18 U.S.C. § 1623. The district court denied the reduction sought.

Upon consideration, we find the record supports the district court's decision. The heart of Boles' motion is the contention that there was a factual inaccuracy in the government's sentencing memorandum, that this inaccuracy became part of the presentence report, and that Boles was denied due process when he was not permitted to challenge this inaccuracy under Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c) (3) (D). We believe the district court correctly applied Rule 32.

Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

 *

The Honorable John D. Holschuh, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.