IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-31134
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CLARENCE A. NUGENT,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 95-CR-10005-03
- - - - - - - - - -
June 25, 1996
Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Clarence A. Nugent appeals his guilty-plea conviction for
using and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug-
trafficking offense. Nugent argues that in light of the
intervening change to the law defining an offense under 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(c)(1), his guilty plea was unknowing based on the factual
basis no longer supporting his plea. The portion of the factual
basis which was undisputed is sufficient to support criminal
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 95-31134
-2-
liability under § 924(c)(1). See Bailey v. United States, 116 S.
Ct. 501, 508 (1995).
Nugent argues that Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1) was violated by
the district court failing to explain adequately the mandatory
nature of the five-year term of imprisonment and the court
failing to determine whether Nugent understood the mandatory
sentence. Our review of the record confirms that the court's
explanation of the penalties was adequate under Rule 11 and that
any error by the court by its failure to inquire whether Nugent
understood was harmless. See United States v. Johnson, 1 F.3d
296, 302 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.