U.S. v. GERMAN, 283 Fed.Appx. 208 (5th Cir. 2008)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Arnoldo GERMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-40263 Conference Calendar.United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 19, 2008.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Arnoldo German, Olmito, TX, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, USDC No. 1:06-CR-814-1.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

Arnoldo German appeals from his guilty plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute a quantity exceeding five kilograms of cocaine. He argues on appeal that (1) the appeal-waiver provision in his written plea agreement was invalid and (2) the imposed sentence was unreasonable.

Page 209

The Government seeks enforcement of the appeal-waiver provision.

This court reviews de novo whether a waiver provision bars an appeal United States v. Baymon, 312 F.3d 725, 727 (5th Cir. 2002). The record shows that German was aware of his right to appeal and that he was waiving that right by pleading guilty pursuant to his written plea agreement. Moreover, the district court complied with the requirements of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure ll(b)(1)(N). Accordingly, his plea agreement was valid and will be enforced. See United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746 n. 2, 747 (5th Cir. 2005). German’s remaining argument is barred by the appeal-waiver provision.

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.