United States v. Sillemon

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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
December 12, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-11344
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL SILLEMON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:02-CR-92-1-H
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael Sillemon appeals his conviction by a jury of armed
bank robbery and aiding and abetting, using and carrying a
firearm during a violent crime, and conspiracy to commit those
and other related crimes. He argues that the district court
abused its discretion in denying his motion for a continuance.
“This court will reverse a district court’s decision denying
a defendant’s motion for continuance only when the district court

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-11344
-2-
has abused its discretion and the defendant can establish that he
suffered serious prejudice.” United States v. Scott, 48 F.3d
1389, 1393 (5th Cir. 1995) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted). Our review of the record and briefs of the parties
satisfies us that the district court’s decision was neither
arbitrary nor unreasonable because Sillemon changed retained
counsel shortly before trial, and he has failed to show that he
suffered serious prejudice as a result of the denial. See United
States v. Hughey, 147 F.3d 423, 431 (5th Cir. 1998); United
States v. Pollani, 146 F.3d 269, 272 (5th Cir. 1998).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --