Court Opinion

ID: 39814
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 20:35:46+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:22.467648
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                November 9, 2005

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                           No. 05-10570
                         Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BENIGNO ROBLERO-RODRIGUEZ,
                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Northern District of Texas
                     USDC No. 5:05-CR-32-ALL
                       --------------------

Before REAVLEY, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Benigno Roblero-

Rodriquez raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States

v. Valdez-Sanchez, 414 F.3d 539, 541 (5th Cir. 2005), which held

that the revocation of supervised release is not an “additional

charge” within the meaning of the plea agreement provision

barring the Government from bringing additional charges.       The

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the

judgment of the district court is 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.