Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-11348/USCOURTS-ca5-14-11348-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Raul Roberto Ramirez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-11348

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAUL ROBERTO RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:13-CR-412

Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Raul Roberto Ramirez challenges the voluntariness of his guilty plea 

conviction for conspiracy to possess 500 grams or more of methamphetamine 

with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846, as well as

the substantive reasonableness of his within-Guidelines sentence. He argues 

that the appeal waiver and his guilty plea are both involuntary because he was 

not properly admonished during rearraignment as to the minimum sentence 

 

* 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

September 17, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-11348 Document: 00513197644 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/17/2015
No. 14-11348

2

the court could impose in violation of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal 

Procedure. FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(b)(1)(I). After Ramirez filed his opening brief, 

however, the court reporter filed in the district court a revised rearraignment 

transcript, and we granted the government’s unopposed motion to supplement 

the record with the amended transcript, which corrects “a scrivener’s error.” 

See FED. R. APP. P. 10(e)(2). Ramirez does not challenge the accuracy of the 

amended transcript.

The record as supplemented by the amended transcript demonstrates

that Ramirez was correctly admonished that he faced a term of imprisonment 

of not less than ten years. See § 841(b)(1)(A). As the record does not show a 

Rule 11 violation, Ramirez has not established that his guilty plea or the 

appeal waiver were involuntary, and the appeal waiver, which the government 

seeks to invoke, bars Ramirez from challenging the substantive reasonableness 

of his sentence. United States v. Story, 439 F.3d 226, 231 (5th Cir. 2006) 

(holding that an appeal waiver is enforceable to the extent that the government 

invokes it).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 14-11348 Document: 00513197644 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/17/2015