Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-50491/USCOURTS-ca5-15-50491-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Edwardo Salvador Rodriguez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-50491

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EDWARDO SALVADOR RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CR-731-1

Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Edwardo Salvador Rodriguez pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess 

with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine, and the 

district court sentenced him to 250 months of imprisonment and a $5,000 fine. 

Rodriguez argues that the district court erred by failing to verify at the 

sentencing hearing that he had read the presentence report, as required by 

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(1)(A).

 

* 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 3, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-50491 Document: 00513490884 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/03/2016
No. 15-50491

2

Because Rodriguez did not object in the district court, we review his 

claim for plain error. United States v. Esparza-Gonzales, 268 F.3d 272, 274 

(5th Cir. 2001). To show plain error, Rodriguez must show a forfeited error 

that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. Puckett v. 

United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). As Rodriguez acknowledges, he cannot 

show plain error. See Esparza-Gonzalez, 268 F.3d at 274.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-50491 Document: 00513490884 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/03/2016