IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-41413

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANGEL MARIO GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:11-CR-164-1

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Angel Mario Gonzalez pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea

agreement, to one count of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute more

than five kilograms of cocaine and one count of transaction money laundering. 

Within the plea agreement, Gonzalez waived his right to appeal or to file a

postconviction challenge to his conviction or sentence, although he reserved his

right to challenge a sentence exceeding the statutory maximum or an upward

sentencing departure not requested by the Government. The district court

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 20, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 11-41413 Document: 00512282090 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/20/2013
No. 11-41413

ultimately imposed a sentence of 210 months in prison, at the bottom of the

applicable guidelines range, concurrent five- and three-year terms of supervised

release, and a fine of $5000.

On appeal, Gonzalez asserts that the district court erred in determining

that he possessed a firearm during the commission of the drug trafficking

offense, which resulted in a two-level increase to the base offense level. He

maintains that the court also improperly applied a two-level enhancement for

his role in the offense. Gonzalez contends that his sentence is substantively

unreasonable in light of these purported errors and based on his contention that

the district court failed to consider various mitigating factors before its

imposition. The Government has moved to dismiss the case in light of the

waiver-of-appeal provision in the plea agreement; alternatively,the Government

requests an extension of time to file an appellate brief. Gonzalez has not

submitted a reply brief.

Gonzalez’s claims do not fall within the listed exceptions to the appeal

waiver. A review of the record indicates that Gonzalez knowingly and

voluntarily waived his right to appeal because he indicated that he had reviewed

and understood the waiver provision. See United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d

744, 746 (5th Cir. 2005). The Government did not breach the plea agreement. 

Therefore, the appeal waiver bars consideration of Gonzalez’s appellate issues. 

Although a valid waiver does not implicate our jurisdiction, see United States v.

Story, 439 F.3d 226, 230 (5th Cir. 2006), Gonzalez’s appeal of his sentence is

clearly barred by the waiver. As a result, the Government’s motion to dismiss

the appeal is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See United

States v. Jacobs, 635 F.3d 778, 783 (5th Cir. 2011); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The

Government’s alternative motion to extend time to file its brief is DENIED as

moot.

2

 Case: 11-41413 Document: 00512282090 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/20/2013