USA v. John Zimmerman, No. 17-40037 (5th Cir. 2017)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 17-40037 Document: 00514226318 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/06/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-40037 Summary Calendar FILED November 6, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JOHN CRAIG ZIMMERMAN, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:07-CR-232-1 Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * John Craig Zimmerman, federal prisoner # 71281-179, appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of audita querela challenging the substantive reasonableness of the cumulative 300-month sentence imposed following his convictions for enticing a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such conduct, receiving child pornography, and possessing child pornography. Zimmerman 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 17-40037 Document: 00514226318 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/06/2017 No. 17-40037 argues that he is entitled to relief in light of recent studies showing that recidivism rates for sex offenders are not as high as previously thought. Although the district court did not explain its decision denying Zimmerman’s request for relief, Zimmerman cannot challenge the reasonableness of his sentence through a writ of audita querela. See United States v. Miller, 599 F.3d 484, 488 (5th Cir. 2010). Further, although Zimmerman has filed a letter pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28 (j), we decline to address the issue raised therein because it is raised for the first time and relies on cases available before Zimmerman filed his opening brief. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 2

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.