United States v. Francisco Madrigal , 575 F. App'x 265 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 13-40730      Document: 00512694173         Page: 1    Date Filed: 07/10/2014
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 13-40730                                  FILED
    Summary Calendar                            July 10, 2014
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    FRANCISCO MADRIGAL,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 2:11-CR-928-1
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Francisco Madrigal pleaded guilty to possession of more than 1000
    kilograms of marijuana with intent to distribute. He was sentenced to 90
    months in prison and five years of supervised release. He now appeals the
    district court’s denial of his motion to suppress statements he contends were
    obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 13-40730     Document: 00512694173     Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/10/2014
    No. 13-40730
    We conclude that Gonzalez waived his right to appeal the suppression ruling
    by entering an unconditional guilty plea.
    A voluntary and unconditional guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional
    defects in the prior proceedings, including the right to raise any further
    objections based on a district court’s denial of a motion to suppress. United
    States v. Stevens, 
    487 F.3d 232
    , 238 (5th Cir. 2007). Although a defendant may
    plead guilty conditionally and preserve appeal rights, the plea must be in
    writing, must have the consent of the prosecution and approval of the court,
    and must explicitly designate the issues being preserved for appeal. FED.
    R. CRIM. P. 11(a)(2); United States v. Wise, 
    179 F.3d 184
    , 186-87 (5th Cir. 1999).
    The written plea agreement contains no evidence of any reservation of
    rights. Further, there is no evidence in the record that Madrigal expressed an
    intent to plead guilty conditionally or that the Government and the court did
    not oppose such a plea, which might excuse technical noncompliance with Rule
    11(a)(2).   See 
    Stevens, 487 F.3d at 238
    .     Madrigal’s opening brief asserts
    without support that his plea was conditional. Even after the issue was raised
    by the Government, he did not file a reply brief responding to the Government’s
    assertion of waiver.    Further, the record demonstrates that the plea was
    voluntary. See 
    id. In light
    of the foregoing, Madrigal may not appeal the
    district court’s suppression ruling. See 
    Wise, 179 F.3d at 187
    .
    Madrigal’s appeal is entirely without merit, and we dismiss it as
    frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. In addition, we caution counsel that misstating
    the record regarding Madrigal’s reservation of his right to appeal, pursuing an
    appeal despite an unconditional plea, and failing to address that issue in a
    reply brief after it was raised by the Government in its brief needlessly wastes
    judicial resources and will invite sanctions. See United States v. Gaitan, 
    171 F.3d 222
    , 223-24 (5th Cir. 1999) (imposing sanctions for similar conduct).
    2
    Case: 13-40730   Document: 00512694173   Page: 3   Date Filed: 07/10/2014
    No. 13-40730
    APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; MOTION TO DISMISS
    DENIED AS MOOT; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-40730

Citation Numbers: 575 F. App'x 265

Judges: Higginbotham, Dennis, Graves

Filed Date: 7/10/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024