Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hervey ROEL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-07-28
Citations: 667 F. App'x 511
Docket Number: No. 15-41559 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hervey ROEL, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 667
Pages: 511–511

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hervey ROEL, Defendant-Appellant
No. 15-41559 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 07/28/2016
Paul Eunkuk Kim, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee
Larry Logan Warner, Sr., Law Offices of Larry Warner, Harlingen, TX, for Defendant-Appellant
Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Hervey Roel appeals his guilty plea convictions for drug offenses and the resulting 300-month sentence, which was below the Guidelines. Roel argues that his guilty plea and the waiver of his appellate rights were not knowing and voluntary. The Government moves to summarily dismiss the appeal as barred by the appeal waiver or, in the alternative, moves for an extension of time to file a brief.
We review de novo the validity of an appeal waiver. United States v. Burns, 433 F.3d 442, 445 (5th Cir. 2005). Roel's signed plea agreement and rearraignment transcript show that he freely and knowingly pleaded guilty and waived his appellate rights. See United States v. Portillo, 18 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Guerra, 94 F.3d 989, 995 (5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Government's motion for dismissal is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. The alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED as unnecessary.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47,5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not , precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.