United States v. Calderon-Monteczuma

01-21183Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitJun 5, 2003

Full text

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
June 5, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 01-21183
Summary Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SERGIO CALDERON-MONTECZUMA,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-01-CR-385-ALL)
_________________________________________________________________
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Sergio Calderon-Monteczuma appeals the sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry following
deportation. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) and (b)(2). He contends that, in
the special conditions of supervised release, the district court
impermissibly delegated its authority by ordering the probation
office to determine: (1) the extent of Calderon’s required
participation in drug and/or alcohol treatment programs; and (2)
the drug-detection techniques to which Calderon must submit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Calderon did not object, however, to the special conditions.
“The plain error doctrine requires parties to raise objections at
procedurally opportune junctures as early in the judicial process
as possible.” United States v. Lopez, 923 F.2d 47, 50 (5th Cir.),
cert. denied, 500 U.S. 924 (1991). At sentencing, Calderon had
ample opportunity to lodge an objection to the special conditions.
Accordingly, our review is limited to plain error. E.g., United
States v. Vega, 324 F.3d 798, 801 n.3 (5th Cir. 2003); Lopez, 923
F.2d at 50.
Calderon has failed to provide binding authority demonstrating
that the delegation was a clear or obvious error. Therefore,
Calderon has not demonstrated this required element for reversible
plain error. See Vega, 324 F.3d at 801 n.3.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.