Usa v. Oscar Edgardo Guillen 13-50473.0 (1) (5th Cir. 5-2-14 non-precedent)

232 views

Published on

Counsel is WARNED against filing appeal where there was a knowing waiver of appeal rights. Court reminds counsel of potential for sanctions (fine and/or jail time for contempt?).

Published in: Law
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
232
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Usa v. Oscar Edgardo Guillen 13-50473.0 (1) (5th Cir. 5-2-14 non-precedent)

  1. 1. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-50473 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. OSCAR EDGARDO-GUILLEN, also known as Cabo, also known as Jose Francisco Castillo, also known as Jose Francisco Castellon, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:10-CR-320 Before REAVLEY, JONES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Oscar Edgardo-Guillen appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine. He was sentenced to 188 months of imprisonment and four years of supervised release. He contends that the district court erroneously calculated * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 2, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-50473 Document: 00512616843 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/02/2014
  2. 2. No. 13-50473 the guidelines range. The Government responds that his claims of error are barred by his appeal waiver. Edgardo-Guillen does not acknowledge the existence of the appeal waiver much less challenge its validity on appeal. A review of the record indicates that he knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his sentence, see United States v. Portillo, 18 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir. 1994), and that his claims of error regarding the calculation of the guidelines range are barred by the appeal waiver. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. Counsel is WARNED that the filing of an appeal contrary to an appeal waiver is a needless waste of resources and could result in sanctions. See United States v. Gaitan, 171 F.3d 222, 224 (5th Cir. 1999). 2 Case: 13-50473 Document: 00512616843 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/02/2014

×