IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-30753
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
EDDIE LEE GLENN,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 95-CR-354-E
- - - - - - - - - -
July 14, 1997
Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eddie Lee Glenn appeals his conviction of possession with
intent to distribute crack cocaine and conspiring to possess with
intent to distribute crack cocaine. Glenn also appeals his
sentence. He contends that the district court erred by denying
his motion to suppress evidence and erred by denying his
requested instruction regarding use of extrinsic bad-act
evidence; that the evidence was insufficient to support his
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 CIR. R.
47.5.4.
No. 96-30753
- 2 -
conviction; and that the 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack
cocaine and powder cocaine offenses violates the Due Process
Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and the Eighth Amendment.
First, the tips provided by the confidential informant and
police corroboration of those tips gave rise to probable cause to
stop the van driven by Glenn and to arrest Glenn. Gates v.
Illinois, 462 U.S. 213, 241-46; United States v. Carrillo-
Morales, 27 F.3d 1054, 1062 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S.
Ct. 1163 (1995). Second, Glenn elicited the extrinsic-act
evidence for which he sought a limiting instruction. He may not
complain about an error that he invited. Tel-Phonic Servs., Inc.
v. TBS Int’l Inc., 975 F.2d 1134, 1137 (5th Cir. 1992).
Third, the evidence indicated that the confidential
informant and Eric Ardoin negotiated the crack cocaine
transaction underlying Glenn’s conviction and that Ardoin
enlisted Glenn’s assistance. Glenn helped Ardoin obtain and wrap
the crack cocaine, then drove the crack cocaine from Houston to
Houma, Louisiana. The evidence was sufficient to support Glenn’s
conviction. United States v. Velgar-Vivero, 8 F.3d 236, 241 (5th
Cir. 1993); United States v. Ayala, 887 F.2d 62, 67 (5th Cir.
1989).
Fourth, we have squarely rejected Glenn’s arguments
regarding the sentencing disparity between crack and powder
cocaine. United States v. Fisher, 22 F.3d 574, 579 (5th Cir.
1994). We remind counsel that federal public defenders, like all
No. 96-30753
- 3 -
counsel, have a duty not to pursue frivolous issues on appeal.
United States v. Burleson, 22 F.3d 93, 95 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.