Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-50028/USCOURTS-ca5-14-50028-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Angel Rene Hernandez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50028

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANGEL RENE HERNANDEZ, also known as Angel Hernandez, also known as 

Angel Renee Hernandez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:12-CR-538-1

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Angel Rene Hernandez pleaded guilty to 

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and was 

sentenced to 144 months in prison. He contends for the first time on appeal 

that the district court erred in assigning criminal history points to two of his 

prior convictions. The Government urges us to enforce the appellate waiver in 

* 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

April 16, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 14-50028 Document: 00513007815 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2015
No. 14-50028

the plea agreement. Hernandez does not address the appeal waiver in his 

opening brief, and he has not filed a reply brief to respond to the Government’s 

argument. We review the validity of the appeal waiver de novo. See United 

States v. Baymon, 312 F.3d 725, 727 (5th Cir. 2002). 

Hernandez waived his right to appeal his sentence unless it was the 

result of an upward departure, ineffective assistance of counsel, or 

prosecutorial misconduct. The waiver was knowing and voluntary, as the 

record shows that Hernandez knew of his right to appeal and that he was 

giving up that right in the plea agreement. See United States v. Portillo, 

18 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir. 1994). Because the plain language of the waiver 

provision applies to Hernandez’s challenge to his criminal history category, we 

enforce the waiver. See United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 544 (5th Cir. 

2005). Counsel for Hernandez is cautioned that pursuing an appeal contrary 

to a valid waiver is a needless waste of judicial resources that could result in 

sanctions. See United States v. Gaitan, 171 F.3d 222, 223-24 (5th Cir. 1999).

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 14-50028 Document: 00513007815 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2015