Opinion
No. 15-11078
08-16-2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. DANTANA TANKSLEY, Defendant-Appellant
Conference Calendar Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:15-CR-38-1 Before REAVLEY, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. --------
Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Dantana Tanksley raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145-46 (5th Cir. 2013), United States v. Rose, 587 F.3d 695, 705 (5th Cir. 2009), and United States v. Ford, 509 F.3d 714, 716-17 (5th Cir. 2007). In Alcantar, we rejected the argument that Nat'l Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012), affected our prior jurisprudence rejecting challenges to the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). 733 F.3d at 145-46. In Rose, we held that Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 556 U.S. 646 (2009), did not alter the proof required in a § 922(g)(1) case. 587 F.3d at 705. In Ford, we held that a Texas conviction for possession with intent to deliver is a "controlled substance offense." 509 F.3d at 716-17.
Accordingly, the Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.