United States v. Slaughter ( 2002 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-20021
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JERRON CYRIL SLAUGHTER,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
H-01-187-1
--------------------
December 16, 2002
Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant-Appellant Jerron Cyril Slaughter appeals the
judgment of the district court following his conviction on one
count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, a violation of
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He first asserts that the statute of
conviction is unconstitutional, but his position is without merit.
As Slaughter concedes, we have previously rejected this contention,
and we are bound by our prior decisions. See United States v.
Cavazos, 288 F.3d 706, 712 (5th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 123 S.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
Ct. 253 (2002); United States v. Short, 181 F.3d 620, 624 (5th Cir.
1999); United States v. Rawls, 85 F.3d 240 (5th Cir. 1996).
Slaughter also contends that the prosecutor committed
reversible error during closing arguments by bolstering the
credibility of government witnesses, by shifting the burden of
proof to him, and by making an improper plea to the jury for
support of law enforcement. In reviewing a claim of prosecutorial
misconduct in the form of improper argument, we must first decide
whether the disputed remarks were improper. See United States v.
Munoz, 150 F.3d 401, 414 (5th Cir. 1998). Slaughter has not shown
that any of the disputed remarks were improper. See United States
v. Thomas, 12 F.3d 1350, 1367 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v.
Palmer, 37 F.3d 1080, 1086 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v.
Fields, 72 F.3d 1200, 1208 (5th Cir. 1996). He thus has not shown
that any of the remarks warrant reversal of his conviction.
Accordingly, we affirm Slaughter’s conviction and sentence.
Finally, Slaughter contends, and the government concedes, that
there is a clerical error in his judgment. The judgment reflects
that Slaughter pleaded guilty when the record shows that he was
convicted after a jury trial. We thus remand this case to the
district court for the limited purpose of correcting this apparent
clerical error. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36.
CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; REMANDED FOR CORRECTION OF
CLERICAL ERROR.
2