Court Opinion

ID: 9951774
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-19 00:02:07.986013+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:42:41.934867
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-11102           Document: 108-1           Page: 1     Date Filed: 03/18/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                   ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 22-11102
                                  Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                  ____________                                March 18, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Adam Contreras,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:22-CR-43-1
                   ______________________________

Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Adam Contreras pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement,
to possessing with the intent to distribute a controlled substance. The district
court sentenced him to 240 months of imprisonment and three years of
supervised release. On appeal, Contreras argues that the district court
committed plain error by not allowing him the opportunity to allocute at

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-11102       Document: 108-1      Page: 2     Date Filed: 03/18/2024

                                 No. 22-11102

sentencing, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
32(i)(4)(A)(ii). Though Contreras’s plea agreement contains an appellate
waiver, he argues that this court should not enforce the appeal waiver under
a miscarriage-of-justice exception.
         Whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal is a question we review de
novo. United States v. Keele, 755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 2014). Although
some other circuits have recognized the possibility of a miscarriage-of-justice
exception to appeal waivers, “we have declined explicitly either to adopt or
to reject it.” United States v. Barnes, 953 F.3d 383, 389 (5th Cir. 2020).
Nevertheless, Contreras has failed to explain the scope of a potential
miscarriage-of-justice exception or why it should apply to his unpreserved
allocution challenge. See id. Accordingly, Contreras’s appeal waiver bars
this appeal. See United States v. Story, 439 F.3d 226, 230-31 & n.5 (5th Cir.
2006).
         APPEAL DISMISSED.

                                      2