Court Opinion

ID: 9352602
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-09 00:00:34.406565+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:58:10.490738
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-60367         Document: 00516601078             Page: 1      Date Filed: 01/06/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-60367
                                     Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                                                                January 6, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Oscar Thomas, III,

                                                                  Defendant—Appellant.

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Mississippi
                                USDC No. 1:21-CR-14-1

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Oscar Thomas, III appeals the 110-month sentence imposed following
   his guilty plea conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He
   argues that the sentence was substantively unreasonable because the district

          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-60367      Document: 00516601078           Page: 2    Date Filed: 01/06/2023

                                     No. 22-60367

   court gave undue weight to his criminal history and did not adequately
   account for other relevant sentencing factors.
          The Government moves to dismiss the appeal or, alternatively, for
   summary affirmance based on the appeal waiver in Thomas’s written plea
   agreement. Thomas’s challenge to his waiver as invalid or unenforceable
   under the circumstances lacks merit, as he was specifically admonished about
   his right to appeal and that he was giving up that right as part of his plea, and
   the waiver broadly precludes any challenge to Thomas’s sentence. See
   United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 544 (5th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, the
   Government’s motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED. Its alternative
   motion for summary affirmance is DENIED. The appeal is DISMISSED.

                                          2