United States v. Roy Edward Duckett ( 1997 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 96-3634
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                 *
    *
    v.                                 *   Appeal from the United States
    *   District Court for the
    Roy Edward Duckett,                     *   Eastern District of Arkansas.
    aka Leroy Edward Duckett,               *
    *         [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                *
    ___________
    Submitted:     April 1, 1997
    Filed:   April 7, 1997
    ___________
    Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Leroy Edward Duckett appeals the district court's1 denial of his
    motion to dismiss for a violation of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §
    3161, and from the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possessing
    a forged security, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 513(a).        We conclude that
    Duckett waived his speedy-trial claim, and affirm his sentence.
    After the district court rescheduled the joint trial of Duckett and
    his co-defendant for April 22, 1996, Duckett moved to
    1
    The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District
    Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
    dismiss, arguing that he had suffered a violation under the Speedy Trial
    Act.    The district court denied the motion, and Duckett later pleaded
    guilty.    There is no indication in the record before us that Duckett
    entered into a conditional guilty plea, preserving his right to appeal the
    speedy-trial issue.    See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2).   We therefore conclude
    that Duckett waived his right to appeal the issue.      See Unites States v.
    Vaughan, 
    13 F.3d 1186
    , 1187-88 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    511 U.S. 1094
    (1994); United States v. Cox, 
    985 F.2d 427
    , 433 (8th Cir. 1993); United
    States v. Gines, 
    964 F.2d 972
    , 977 (10th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 
    506 U.S. 1069
    (1993).
    Duckett also challenges the district court's refusal to grant him an
    acceptance-of-responsibility reduction.      We conclude that the district
    court did not clearly err in denying the adjustment.    See United States v.
    Campos, 
    87 F.3d 261
    , 264 (8th Cir.) (standard of review), cert. denied, 
    117 S. Ct. 539
    (1996).    Although Duckett pleaded guilty to the instant offense,
    he subsequently engaged in additional criminal conduct--misrepresenting a
    social security number.    See United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual §
    3E1.1, comment. (n.3) (1995); United States v. Byrd, 
    76 F.3d 194
    , 196-97
    (8th Cir. 1996); United States v. Poplawski, 
    46 F.3d 42
    , 43 (8th Cir.),
    cert. denied, 
    115 S. Ct. 2261
    (1995).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-