IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-41025
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DOUGLAS RAY STEVENS,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-93-CR-115-1
- - - - - - - - - -
August 30, 1996
Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Douglas Ray Stevens appeals his convictions of possession of
a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of a firearm by a
fugitive. Stevens contends that the district court erred by
refusing to admit evidence of a polygraph examination he took and
that the district court erred by denying his motion to sever the
charges into different counts for the two different weapons he
was alleged to have possessed.
*
Pursuant to Local 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-41025
- 2 -
The rejection of the polygraph evidence was not an abuse of
discretion. The questions asked during the procedure were of
marginal relevance; the modification of one of the more relevant
questions was questionable; and the defense refused to allow the
Government to participate effectively in the polygraph procedure.
See United States v. Pettigrew, 77 F.3d 1500, 1514-15 (5th Cir.
1996); United States v. Posado, 57 F.3d 428, 432 (5th Cir. 1995).
The denial of Stevens’s severance motion was not an abuse of
discretion. See United States v. Holloway, 1 F.3d 307, 310 (5th
Cir. 1993). First, Stevens’s allegation that the Government
produced no evidence of possession of one of the two revolvers
alleged in the superseding indictment is without a factual basis.
Second, the district court’s jury instruction was sufficient to
cure any prejudice resulting from any misjoinder of charges. See
United States v. Bullock, 71 F.3d 171, 175 (5th Cir. 1995), cert.
denied, 116 S. Ct. 1365 (1996).
AFFIRMED.