Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Adrian Mejorado GUERRERO, Defendant-Appellant
Defendant-Appellant Adrian Mejorado Guerrero appeals his within-guidelines sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to conspiracy to launder monetary instruments, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956. Without mentioning that his plea agreement contains a waiver of the right to appeal his sentence, Mejorado Guerrero contends that the district court improperly calculated his applicable guidelines range. The Government seeks to enforce the appeal waiver.
We review de novo whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal. United States v. Keele, 755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 2014). As demonstrated by the rearraignment transcript and by Mejorado Guerrero’s signature on the plea agreement, he knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights. Moreover, the Government complied with its duties under the plea agreement. See United States v. Keresztury, 293 F.3d 750, 755-57 (5th Cir. 2002). Therefore, the waiver is enforceable and applies here. See Keele, 755 F.3d at 754-55. In light of the enforceable appeal waiver, we DISMISS this appeal.
Counsel for Mejorado Guerrero is cautioned that pursuing an appeal contrary to a valid waiver is a needless waste of resources and could result in sanctions. See United States v. Gaitan, 171 F.3d 222, 223-24 (5th Cir. 1999).
As a final matter, there is a clerical error in the written judgment, which incorrectly lists Mejorado Guerrero’s statute of conviction as 18 U.S.C. § 956 instead of § 1956. Accordingly, we REMAND for the limited purpose of correcting the clerical error in the written judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36. See United States v. Higgins, 739 F.3d 733, 739 n.16 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v. Rosales, 448 Fed.Appx. 466, 466-67 (5th Cir. 2011).
FOOTNOTES
PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-50669
Decided: May 08, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)