Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Theresa Ann TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-12-12
Citations: 157 F. App'x 727
Docket Number: No. 04-41671
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Theresa Ann TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 157
Pages: 727–727

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Theresa Ann TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-41671.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Dec. 12, 2005.
Robert L. Rawls, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Thomas John Burbank, Burbank & Hamm, Beaumont, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Theresa Ann Taylor appeals her sentence following her conviction of one charge of possession of stolen mail. The Government has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal based on the appellate-waiver clause found in Taylor's plea agreement. Taylor argues that the clause does not preclude her appeal. She notes that she preserved her right to appeal a sentence that was the result of an upward departure from the pertinent Guidelines range. She argues that the district court so departed by sentencing her based on a Guidelines range that was calculated using facts that were neither admitted by her nor found by a jury.
This court will dismiss an appeal that is precluded by a valid waiver. See United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 747 (5th Cir.2005). There is nothing in the record to indicate that Taylor's waiver was not knowing and voluntary. Moreover, the plain language of the waiver covers the claims that she seeks to present in this appeal. Her arguments to the contrary are unavailing. See id. at 746-47. Consequently, the Government's motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.