Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ambrose AGWUIBE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-06-22
Citations: 135 F. App'x 741
Docket Number: No. 04-20464
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ambrose AGWUIBE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 135
Pages: 741–742

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ambrose AGWUIBE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-20464.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided June 22, 2005.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mark Michael Dowd, Brownsville, Kimberly S. Keller, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Ambrose Agwuibe appeals his 63-month sentence on a conviction for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud, and aiding and abetting. 18 U.S.C. § 2, 371, 1343. For the first time on appeal, Agwuibe argues that his 12-level enhancement for fraud in excess of $200,000, his four-level enhancement for fraud involving more than 50 victims, and his two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice were unconstitutional under Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004).
Because Agwuibe raises these arguments for the first time on appeal, they are reviewed for plain error. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520 (5th Cir.2005), petition for cert. filed (Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517). Agwuibe fails to demonstrate that the district court would have reached a different result under an advisory guidelines scheme. See id. at 521-22. Accordingly, Agwuibe cannot establish plain error with respect to the district court's sentencing enhancements. See id.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.