United States v. Castro ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                   June 23, 2003
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 02-50306
    Summary Calendar
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    JOHN WALTER CASTRO, JR.,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. P-01-CR-261-1
    --------------------
    Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    John Walter Castro, Jr. appeals his conviction for
    possession with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more but
    less than 1,000 kilograms of marijuana and aiding and abetting in
    violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2.       He argues
    that the district court erred in denying his motion to withdraw
    his guilty plea based upon an intervening district court decision
    that he asserts rendered his claim of unlawful search and seizure
    more viable.
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
    No. 02-50306
    -2-
    The protection against illegal searches and seizures is a
    nonjurisdictional defect in the proceedings before the district
    court that is waived by the entry of an unconditional, knowing,
    and voluntary guilty plea.    United States v. Smallwood, 
    920 F.2d 1231
    , 1240 (5th Cir. 1991).    This is not a case “where
    intervening law has established that a defendant’s actions do not
    constitute a crime and thus that the defendant is actually
    innocent of the charged offense,” thereby justifying an exception
    to this rule.    United States v. Andrade, 
    83 F.3d 729
    , 731 (5th
    Cir. 1996).   Castro has failed to carry his burden of proving
    that he is entitled to withdraw his guilty plea.    See United
    States v. Brewster, 
    137 F.3d 853
    , 857-58 (5th Cir. 1998).
    Therefore, under the totality of the circumstances, the
    district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Castro’s
    motion to withdraw his guilty plea.    See 
    id. AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-50306

Filed Date: 6/24/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021