The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-20351
(Summary Calendar)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
EARL ST. ELMO BROWN,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(USDC No. CR-H-95-63-1)
- - - - - - - - - -
February 14, 1997
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Earl Stelmo Brown appeals his conviction for being a felon in
possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). In
an intertwined argument, Brown contends that the district court
erred by denying his motion for a new trial without conducting an
evidentiary hearing and that he received ineffective assistance of
counsel. Our review of the record and of the arguments convinces
us that no reversible error was committed.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
As Brown does not show prejudice from his assertion that trial
counsel’s performance was deficient, his ineffective-assistance
claim is without merit. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S.
668, 687 (1984). Nor has Brown shown that the district court
abused its discretion by denying, without conducting an evidentiary
hearing, his motion for a new trial based on his claim of
ineffective-assistance. See United States v. Blackburn, 9 F.3d
353, 358 (5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.
2