Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Kenneth GREEN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-10-24
Citations: 251 F. App'x 897
Docket Number: No. 07-30166
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Kenneth GREEN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 251
Pages: 897–897

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Kenneth GREEN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-30166
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 24, 2007.
Matthew M. Coman, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Gary V. Schwabe, Jr., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Green pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon, and the district court varied from the Guidelines and sentenced Green to 60 months of imprisonment. Green argues that the district court's refusal to allow counsel to comment on sentencing matters after the court announced its intention to impose, sua sponte, a non-guidelines sentence violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(1)(C) and the Due Process Clause. The Government seeks enforcement of the sentence-appeal waiver in the plea agreement.
Our review of the record shows that Green's sentence-appeal waiver was knowing and voluntary and that, under the plain language of the plea agreement, the waiver applies to the circumstances at hand. See United States v. Burns, 433 F.3d 442, 445-46 (5th Cir.2005); United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 544 (5th Cir.2005). Green's argument that the asserted sentencing error is not subject to waiver is not supported by relevant authority and is not persuasive. Accordingly, Green's appeal waiver bars review of the issues he seeks to raise on appeal.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.