United States v. Foor, Scott ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                            NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
    To be cited only in accordance with
    Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the Seventh Circuit
    Chicago, Illinois 60604
    Argued February 14, 2008
    Decided May 6, 2008
    Before
    DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge
    ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge
    ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge
    No. 06-3940
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       Appeal from the United States District Court
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                        for the Southern District of Indiana,
    Indianapolis Division
    v.
    No. IP06-CR-0041-01
    SCOTT FOOR,
    John Daniel Tinder, Judge
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ORDER
    Scott Foor pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. The district court
    sentenced Foor to 110 months in custody, three years of supervised release, a $500 fine and a
    $100 special assessment. Foor’s only claim in this appeal is that the district court judge erred in
    failing to establish a specific schedule for making fine payments during Foor’s term of
    imprisonment. Due to the limited nature of his appeal, we need not recite the details of his crime
    and plea agreement other than to note that by the terms of his plea agreement Foor may
    challenge this portion of his sentence.
    No. 06-3940                                                                                       2
    Foor did not specifically object to the district court’s fine order at sentencing, so we
    review the district court’s actions for plain error only. U.S. v. Kelly, 
    519 F.3d 355
    , 362, n.1 (7th
    Cir. 2008). That is, in order to reverse the order of the district court, there must have been (1) an
    error, (2) it must have been plain and (3) it must have affected Foor’s substantial rights. U.S. v.
    Olano, 
    507 U.S. 725
    , 732 (1993).
    The issue raised in this case can be resolved completely by reference to our recently
    released opinion in U.S. v. Ellis, No. 05-4677, 
    2008 WL 879861
     (7th Cir. Apr. 3, 2008). Ellis
    instructs that where a court has ordered a fine payment due immediately, it is not error for the
    district court to fail to set a schedule for making fine payments while a defendant is incarcerated.
    Id. at *3. Nor must a court set a schedule of payments for any unpaid amount remaining during
    the period of supervised release. Id.
    The district court’s order in this matter is AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-3940

Judges: Manion, Rovner, Williams

Filed Date: 5/6/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024