Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carlos Jose CHAVEZ-FLORES, also known as Carlos Jose Chavez, also known as Eddy Alejandro Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-10-16
Citations: 489 F. App'x 814
Docket Number: No. 12-50133
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carlos Jose CHAVEZ-FLORES, also known as Carlos Jose Chavez, also known as Eddy Alejandro Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 489
Pages: 814–814

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carlos Jose CHAVEZ-FLORES, also known as Carlos Jose Chavez, also known as Eddy Alejandro Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-50133
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 16, 2012.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Judy Fulmer Madewell, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Donna F. Coltharp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Carlos Jose Chavez-Flores raises arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 562-63 (5th Cir.2008), which rejected the argument that fast track programs create unwarranted disparities between defendants in districts that have the programs and defendants in districts that do not have such programs. The Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, its alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.