IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-50829
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ANTWONE DUSHA CHAPPELL,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(W-97-CR-48)
October 6, 1998
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
A jury convicted Defendant-Appellant Antwone Dusha Chappell of
being a felon in possession of a firearm. He appeals his
conviction and corresponding sentence, contending that the district
court erred in several of its evidentiary rulings and in its upward
departure from the Sentencing Guidelines.
We review a trial court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
discretion. If we find error, we review it under the harmless
error doctrine. See United States v. Skipper, 74 F.3d 608, 612
(5th Cir. 1996). We “must affirm evidentiary rulings unless they
affect a substantial right of the complaining party.” Id. We view
any errors found “not in isolation, but in relation to the entire
proceeding.” Id. After a careful review of the record and the
controlling authorities, we are convinced that none of the
evidentiary rulings challenged by Chappell rise to the level of
reversible error. As such, his conviction must be affirmed.
Chappell also appeals his sentence, contending that the
district court erred in relying on unreliable evidence in the
presentence investigation report when departing upward. Chappell’s
contention is without merit. We will affirm an upward departure
when the sentencing court articulates acceptable reasons for
departing and the extent of the departure is reasonable. Under §
4A1.3 of the Guidelines, an upward departure is proper if the
defendant’s criminal history is seriously under-represented by his
Criminal History Category or if he is likely to commit crimes in
the future. Here, the testimony regarding unprosecuted criminal
incidents in Chappell’s past was corroborated by reliable evidence.
See United States v. Puig-Infante, 19 F.3d 929, 943 (5th Cir.),
cert. denied, 513 U.S. 864 (1994). As such, his sentence, too,
must be affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
2