United States v. Cooper

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 06a0096n.06
Filed: February 7, 2006
No. 05-3107
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff-Appellee, )
) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED
v. ) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
) SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
RICKY COOPER, )
)
Defendant-Appellant. )
Before: KENNEDY, COOK, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. Ricky Cooper appeals the district court’s order denying his demand for
discovery and motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33. After hearing
oral argument and reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, this Court
determines that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a panel opinion and affirms the
district court’s decision for the reasons stated in that court’s opinion.
The Court also declines to review Cooper’s claim that he is entitled to re-sentencing in light
of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), as he failed to raise the claim in the motion that is
the subject of this appeal. Had Cooper raised the claim before the district court, it would have been
foreclosed by Humphress v. United States, 398 F.3d 855, 860 (6th Cir. 2005), because “Booker’s
rule does not apply retroactively in collateral proceedings.”