Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 50765 Su m m ar y Cal endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. R IC A R D O G A R C IAA R M E N D A R IZ , a ls o k n o w n a s R ic k y , a ls o k n o w n a s L itt le Ri c ky , a l s o kno w n a s Tr ai ne r , a l s o kno w n a s The M e xi c an D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e W est ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 7: 05- C R
- 48- 5 B ef ore SM ITH , ST E W A R T an d S O U T H W IC K , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * R i cardo G arci a A rm en da ri z a ppe al s hi s guilt y pl e a c o nvic t i o n a nd s e nt e n ce for con sp i ra cyto m a n u factu re, d i strib u te, a n dpo sse ss w i th i n ten t t o d i strib u te m ore t h an 50 gram s of coc ai n e base. A rm en da ri z argues that c ou n selrendered i ne f fe c t iv ea s s i s t anc e o f

c o uns e lb y fail i ng t o a de qua t e l y e xp l ai n t he i m pl i c at i o ns of the pl ea agr ee m ent . H e al so chal l enges the di st r i c tcour t ’ s dec i si on t o de ny a m i t i gati n g rol e adj u st m en tan d safet y rol e adj u st m en t . T h e G overnm en targu es United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D April24, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 50765

2 th a t t h e a p p ea lsh ou l dbe dism i sse dbe ca u se A rm en d a r iz w a ive dh i s ri gh t t o a p p ea lan dthe w a ive r i s va l i dan den forcea b l e. T h e G ov ern m en t also ass erts th a t A rm en d a ri z’ s i n effective a ssistan ce of cou n sel cl a i m i s w i th ou t m erit. T h is co u r t r e v i e w s th e v a lid ityo f a n a p p e a l w a iv e rd e n o v o . S ee Un i t ed S ta te s v . B ay m o n , 31 2 F. 3d 72 5, 72 7 ( 5t h Ci r . 20 02 ) . O ur r e vi e w of t h e rec ord s h o w s th a t A r m e n d a r iz ’ s w a iv e rw a s k n o w in ga n dv o lu n ta r y . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v . Bond , 4 1 4 F .3 d5 4 2 , 5 4 4 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). A r m e n d a ri z’ s sa fety va lve an dm itig a tin gro le a r g u m e n ts d o n o t fa ll w ith in t h e excepti on s t o t h e w aiver. Th u s, A rm en da ri z cann otrai se t h ese c l ai m s on a p p e a l . A r me n d a r i z a l s o a s s e r t s a n i n e f fe c t iv e a s s i s t a n c e o f c o u n s e lc l a i m, w h i ch does i m pl i cat e an excepti on t o t h e app ealw aiver. A l t h o u g h t h i s c ou rt gen eral l y decl i n es t o revi ew cl ai m s of i n ef fect ive assi st an ce of coun sel on di rect a p p e a l , t h e r e c o r di s s u f f i c i e n t l yd e v e l o p e df

o rt h e c o u r tt o a d d r e s s t h e c l a i m. S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. G u l ley , 5 2 6 F .3 d8 0 8 , 8 2 1 (5 th C ir .), cer t . den i ed , 12 9 S . C t. 15 9 ( 20 08 ) . Bec aus e t he r e c o r d r e f l e c t s t hat c o uns e le xp l ai ne d t he i m pl i c at i o ns of t h e pl ea agreem en tto A rm en da ri z, A rm en da ri z’ s i n ef fect ive assi st an ce of c o u n s e l cla im is w ith o u t m e r it. S ee S t ri cklan dv. W ash i ngt on , 466 U . S. 668, 687 (1 9 8 4 ). A rm en da ri z argues, as he did i n th e di st ri ctcourti n a m ot i on f i l ed pu rsuan tt o 18 U . S . C . § 3582 (c) ( 2) , t h at hi s ba se of fen se l evelsh ou l d be redu ced b ytw o le v e ls p u r s u a n t t o S e n te n c in gG u id e lin e s A m e n d m e n t 7 0 6 . In g e n e r a l, A m en dm en t706 reduced t h e base of fen se l evel s set f

ort h i n U . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1( c) ap pl i cabl e t o crack cocai n e of fen ses. H ow ever, t h e base of fen se l evelf

or of fen ses i nvolvi ng 4. 5 ki l ogr am s orm or e o f c r ac k c oc ai ne i s unchanged. Arm endar i z w as h el d accoun t able f

or 9 ki l ogram s of

cr ack cocai n e an d h i s or i gi n albase of fen se l evelw as 38. U n der t h e new am en dm en t s t o § 2D 1. 1( c) ( 1) , A rm en da ri z’ s base of fens e l ev el rem a i ns 38 . Thu s, hi s bas e o f fens e l eve li s unaf fec t ed by A m en dm en t706 t o § 2D 1. 1( c) an d, concom i t an t ly, th e app l i cabl e gu i del i n es ran ge of i m pri sonm en tw as not l ow ered as a res u l tof t h e am en dm en t . B ecau seN o. 08- 50765

3 § 3 5 8 2 (c )(2 ) a u th o r iz e s as e n te n c e re d u c tio n o n lyw h e n th e s e n te n c in gra n g e is l ow ere dby a n a m en d m en t to th e G u i d eli n es, th e dist ri ct cou rt d i d n ot ab u se it s d is c r e tio n in d e n y in gA r m e n d a r iz ’ s m o tio n fo rare d u c tio n o f s e n te n c e . AF FI RM ED