United States v. Crown ( 2022 )

Case: 20-51039 Document: 00516256277 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
March 28, 2022
No. 20-51039
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Lana K. Crown,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 6:19-cr-126-5
Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Lana K. Crown pleaded guilty to a drug crime. She timely appealed.
Her attorney moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738(1967). See also United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Our court
denied that motion, holding the case involved one nonfrivolous issue:
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-51039 Document: 00516256277 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2022
No. 20-51039
“whether the conditions of supervised release identified in the written
judgment as ‘Mandatory Conditions’ and ‘Standard Conditions’ constitute
discretionary conditions that the district court did not orally pronounce at
sentencing.” United States v. Crown, No. 20-51039 (July 23, 2021) (citing
United States v. Diggles, 957 F.3d 551, 556–63 (5th Cir. 2020) (en banc)). The
parties have now briefed that issue.
In the interim, our court has determined that failing to pronounce
standard conditions that are contained in a district’s standing order is not
error. See United States v. Martinez, 15 F.4th 1179, 1180–81 (5th Cir. 2021).
Crown contests four conditions, but she does not contest that each of those
conditions is contained in a Western District of Texas standing order.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2