IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 97-20929
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAMES ADAMS WATTS,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-95-CR-163-1
- - - - - - - - - -
September 24, 1998
Before WISDOM, DUHE’, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
James Adams Watts appeals the sentence he received after his
case was remanded for resentencing. He contends, for the first
time on appeal, that the district court exceeded the scope of
this court’s remand order and violated the law of the case
doctrine by re-sentencing him for conspiracy to commit robbery as
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 97-20929
- 2 -
well as for bank robbery, and he argues that the district court
erred in finding that two prior state-court convictions were
“unrelated cases” under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(2) for purposes of
calculating his criminal history points.
Our review of the record and the arguments and authorities
convinces us that no reversible error was committed. The
district court did not plainly err in recalculating Watts’s
sentence in a manner consistent with this court’s mandate on
remand. See United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th
Cir. 1994)(en banc); United States v. Marmolejo, 139 F.3d 528,
530-31 (5th Cir. 1998), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Jul. 20,
1998)(No. 98-5372). We do not address Watts’s challenge to the
computation of his criminal history score because this issue does
not arise out of this court’s original ruling and Watts did not
raise the issue in his first appeal. See Marmolejo, 139 F.3d at
531.
Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.