David E. Schroeder v. Norman E. Rouse

00-6002Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit28.04.2000

Gesamter Gesetzestext

1The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 99-3677
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Eastern District of Missouri
Ricky Lynn Davis, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: March 29, 2000
Filed: April 10, 2000
___________
Before McMILLIAN, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD,
Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Ricky Lynn Davis appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court1
for the Eastern District of Missouri upon his guilty plea to being a felon in possession
of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court sentenced
appellant to eighty-five months imprisonment and three years supervised release. For
reversal, Davis argues that the court erred in applying a four-level enhancement under

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) (1998) for possessing the firearm in connection with another
felony offense, the circumstances of which were testified to at sentencing by Davis’s
ex-girlfriend. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district
court.
We reject Davis’s challenge to his ex-girlfriend’s credibility. The district court’s
decision to credit her testimony is virtually unreviewable on appeal, and we are
unpersuaded that it should be disturbed in this case. See United States v. Johnson, 169
F.3d 1092, 1098 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 143 (1999). We also find no merit
to Davis’s argument that the district court erred in failing to make specific credibility
findings. See United States v. Moss, 138 F.3d 742, 745 (8th Cir. 1998) (rejecting
argument that district court neglected to make specific credibility findings in light of
conflicting witness testimony, where it was apparent which witness’s testimony court
had credited).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.