UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
DERON DARRELL WEBB, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

11th Cir. | 1991-09-30
No. 90-8868
Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, HATCHETT and DUBINA, Circuit Judges.
943 F.2d 43 Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM: Deron Darrell Webb appeals the sentences he received for armed bank robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. See generally, 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (1988). Webb’s claim of error is that the district court, in sentencing him to a term of imprisonment within the guideline range, failed to state why it did not sentence him “at the lower end of the guideline range,” the recommendation contained in Webb’s plea agreement with the Government. After imposing sentence, the district court, following our instructions in United States v. Jones, 899 F. 2d 1097, 1102-03 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 275, 112 L.Ed.2d 230 (1990), asked the parties: “are there any objections to the sentence[s] imposed or to the findings or conclusions of the Court that support the sentence[s]?” Webb’s attorney stated that there were none. By failing to object, Webb waived the objection he now makes. Finding no “plain error” in his sentencing proceeding, or in the sentence he received, we affirm the district court. AFFIRMED.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. Cobbs, 967 F.2d 1555 (11th Cir. 1992)
    …ey. Therefore, the Government contends, Cobbs waived that ground of objection. We disagree. Although we recognize the general rule stated in Jones, that case does not preclude review of an issue if there is plain error. See United States v. Webb, 943 F. 2d 43 (11th Cir.1991). “Even in the absence of an objection ... we may notice on appeal ‘plain errors’ or errors ‘affecting substantial rights’ of the accused.” United States v. Lippner, 676 F. 2d 456, 467 n. 16 (11th Cir.1982) (quoting Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(…
  • United States v. Neely, 979 F.2d 1522 (11th Cir. 1992)
    …hey had “any objection to the sentence or the manner in which the sentence was pronounced.” Neither Neely nor the government objected to the sentence. By failing to object, Neely waived the objections that he now makes. See United States v. Webb, 943 F. 2d 43, 44 (11th Cir.1991). We will only consider objections raised for the first time on appeal under the plain error doctrine to avoid “manifest injustice.” See Jones, 899 F. 2d at 1103. A. Neely argues that the district court should have sentenced hi…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw