United States v. Ramirez-Tamayo

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-41068
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JUAN SIDRONIO RAMIREZ-TAMAYO,
Defendant-Appellant.
___________________
Consolidated with
No. 01-41129
___________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JUAN RAMIREZ-TAMAYO,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(C-01-CR-171-1
c/w C-01-CR-272-1)
________________________________________________________________
October 10, 2002
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
In this consolidated appeal, Juan Sidronio Ramirez-Tamayo
(“Ramirez”) appeals: (1) the sentence imposed following his guilty-
plea conviction for illegal alien transportation; and (2) the
revocation of his supervised release based on that conviction.
With respect to the former, Ramirez contends that the district
court was not authorized to go beyond the statutory minimum term of
two years’ supervised release when resentencing him under FED. R.
CRIM. P. 35(c).
Because Ramirez did not object to the three-year term of
supervised release imposed by the district court at resentencing,
our review is limited to plain error. See United States v. Kelly,
974 F.2d 22, 24 (5th Cir. 1992). Plain error is a clear or obvious
error that affects a defendant’s substantial rights; relief may be
granted if the plain error seriously affects the fairness,
integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings. E.g.,
United States v. Vasquez, 216 F.3d 456, 459 (5th Cir. 2000), cert.
denied, 531 U.S. 972 (2000). Ramirez has failed to show that the
district court committed plain error by resentencing him to a term
of supervised release in excess of the statutory minimum.
Ramirez’s brief contains no argument that the district court
erred in revoking his supervised release based on his conviction
for alien transportation. Issues not briefed on appeal are deemed
2
abandoned. E.g., Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner,
813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).
AFFIRMED
3