IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-20937
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KENNETH RAY HENDERSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-95-CR-292-2
- - - - - - - - - -
February 11, 1998
Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kenneth Ray Henderson argues that his counsel was
ineffective for failing to object to alleged factual errors in
the PSR and that he was entitled to a downward adjustment for a
minimal or minor role. Henderson’s claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel was not sufficiently developed because it
was not raised in the district court. See United States v.
Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 314 (5th Cir. 1987). Therefore, we decline
to address Henderson’s claim without prejudice to his right to
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 96-20937
-2-
raise the issue in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Id. at 316.
Construing Henderson’s brief as raising, for the first time on
appeal, the issue of whether he is entitled to a downward
adjustment for a minimal or minor role, the review is limited to
plain error. United States v. Calverly, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th
Cir. 1994)(en banc). Henderson does not show plain error. Id.;
Robertson v. Plano City of Texas, 70 F.3d 21, 23 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED.