USA v. White, No. 06-11242 (5th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 27, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-11242 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LARRY WHITE, also known as 187, Defendant-Appellant. -------------------Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:06-CR-77-ALL -------------------Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Larry White appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction of distribution of cocaine base. White was sentenced to 120 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. White asserts that the district court erred in its determination of the quantity of drugs attributable to his offense. The Government has moved for summary affirmance on the ground that White has waived his sole issue on appeal. * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 06-11242 -2Alternatively, the Government seeks an extension of time to file a brief. Prior to sentencing, White objected to the presentence report, raising the same issue he presents on appeal. White, however, withdrew his objection at his sentencing hearing. [W]aiver is the intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right. United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733 (1993) (quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 (1938)). The withdrawal of an objection constitutes the waiver of the objection by the defendant. 927, 931 (5th Cir. 1995). United States v. Musquiz, 45 F.3d Accordingly, White s challenge to the district court s determination of drug quantity is unreviewable. The Government s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, its alternative request for an extension of time is DENIED as unnecessary, and the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
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.
