Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-40558/USCOURTS-ca5-14-40558-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Rafael Cruz
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40558

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAFAEL CRUZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:13-CR-1444-1

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK and COSTA, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Rafael Cruz appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for 

conspiracy to commit hostage taking. He argues that his guilty plea is 

involuntary because the district court violated Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 11(c)(1) by improperly participating in plea negotiations. 

Specifically, he asserts that the district court made statements to his 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 11, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 14-40558 Document: 00513037935 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/11/2015
No. 14-40558

codefendant, Roberto Cruz, at the rearraignment proceeding explaining that a 

lesser sentence might result from a guilty plea.

Because Rafael Cruz did not object on this basis in the district court, this 

court reviews for plain error. See United States v. Davila, 133 S. Ct. 2139, 

2148-50 (2013) (rejecting contention that improper participation in plea 

discussions under Rule 11 requires automatic vacatur rather than analysis 

under the ordinary harmless and plain error standards); United States v. Vonn, 

535 U.S. 55, 58-59 (2002).

Rafael Cruz fails to show that the district court participated in any 

discussions during plea negotiations. The statements of which he complains 

were made by the district court after Rafael Cruz’s plea agreement had been 

negotiated by the parties and disclosed to the district court. There is nothing 

in the record to show a reasonable probability that the district court’s remarks 

to Roberto influenced Rafael Cruz’s decision to plead guilty. Thus, he fails to 

show error, much less reversible plain error, by the district court. See Puckett 

v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 14-40558 Document: 00513037935 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/11/2015