United States v. Brown

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-50007
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
EDWARD LOUIS BROWN, JR., also known as Edward Lewis Brown,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-97-CR-3-1
--------------------
August 2, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Edward Louis Brown, Jr., appeals the district court’s
revocation of his supervised release. He argues that the
district court abused its discretion in revoking his supervised
release because the Government failed to offer sufficient
evidence to establish the alleged violations of the conditions of
supervision.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-50007
-2-
Supervised release may be revoked upon a finding, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that a defendant violated a
condition of his supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3);
United States v. McCormick, 54 F.3d 214, 219 (5th Cir. 1995).
This court reviews the district court’s decision for an abuse of
discretion. See McCormick, 54 F.3d at 219.
In considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the
evidence, this court views “the evidence and all reasonable
inferences that may be drawn from the evidence in a light most
favorable to the government.” United States v. Alaniz-Alaniz, 38
F.3d 788, 792 (5th Cir. 1994) (internal citation omitted).
Because of the clear conflicts between the testimony of the
witnesses, the district court made implicit credibility
determinations in reaching its decision. This court does not
pass on a district court’s determination as to the credibility of
witnesses. Id. at 791. Accepting all reasonable credibility
choices that tend to support the decision, the evidence, when
viewed in its entirety, is sufficient to establish that Brown
violated the conditions of his supervised release.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --