United States v. Dixon ( 2000 )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 99-60458
Summary Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GLEN FREDERICK DIXON, SR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
(4:98-CR-ALL-WS)
_________________________________________________________________
July 7, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Glen Frederick Dixon, Sr., appeals his jury-trial conviction
and sentence for stabbing Officer Bradley Alex with the intent to
do bodily harm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 113(a)(3).
Dixon contends the district court erred in enhancing his
sentence three levels, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(b), for
resisting arrest. He claims the altercation did not occur during
a valid stop because the officer did not have a warrant with him
and was unsure whether there was one at the station.
We review the sentencing court’s application of the Sentencing
Guidelines de novo and accept its fact-findings unless they are
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
clearly erroneous. United States v. Rodriguez-Guzman, 56 F.3d 18,
20 (5th Cir. 1995). Of course, we defer to its credibility
determinations. E.g., United States v. Sotelo, 97 F.3d 782, 799
(5th Cir. 1996).
At the sentencing hearing, the court noted it had heard
Officer Alex’s testimony at trial and found the offense occurred
while Dixon was resisting arrest, indicating it believed the
Officer’s testimony. Dixon has not demonstrated that this finding
was clearly erroneous.
Dixon maintains also that, prior to or during trial, the
district court should have ordered, sua sponte, a mental competency
examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241. We review such failure
for abuse of discretion. United States v. Davis, 61 F.3d 291, 303
(1995).
In his six-line appellate argument, Dixon alludes to testimony
concerning his substance abuse and resulting impairment to his
mental condition, mentions that his behavior at trial was erratic,
and refers to an attempted suicide. However, Dixon failed to
provide any citations to the record in support of these
contentions. For an argument to be reviewed on appeal, it must
contain citations to the part of the record relied upon. FED. R.
APP. P. 28(a)(9)(A). Because it is not adequately briefed, the
issue is considered waived. See United States v. Gourley, 168 F.3d
165, 172-73 n.11, cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 72 (1999). And, because
the suicide attempt, and resulting mental examination, occurred
after trial, the district court could not have relied on it as
- 2 -
justification for questioning Dixon’s competency to earlier stand
trial.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -