United States v. Harvard

99-40660Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit7 de jul. de 2000

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

No. 99-50878
-1-
* 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 99-40660
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JACK C. HARVARD,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:94-CR-52-1
--------------------
June 30, 2000
Before JOLLY, JONES and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jack Harvard appeals from the district court’s denial of
his motion for the correction of his presentence report (PSR)
pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c). He argues that the district
court erred in placing the burden of proof on him to show that
matters in the PSR were inaccurate or irrelevant, in denying him
the right to call as a witness the probation officer responsible
for preparing the PSR, and in finding that the contested
allegations in the PSR were correct and thus properly included.
Even though the Government does not challenge this appeal
on jurisdictional grounds, this court must always be sure of its
appellate jurisdiction, and when there is doubt, the court must

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 99-50878
-2-
address it, sua sponte if necessary. United States v. Key, 205
F.3d 773, 774 (5th Cir. 2000). In United States v. Engs, 884 F.2d
894 (5th Cir. 1989), we concluded that complaints regarding the
contents of a PSR must be raised prior to the imposition of
sentence and, thus, that a district court does not have
jurisdiction to consider a postsentencing “Rule 32" motion to
correct the PSR. Id. at 897. In light of Engs, the district court
was without jurisdiction to entertain Harvard’s Rule 32 motion.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is VACATED, and the
appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See e.g., Key, 205
F.3d at 775.
JUDGMENT VACATED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.