USA v. Rulexy Rodriguez-Vazquez

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Rulexy Rodriguez-Vazquez. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam. The opinion is also available through the Court's Opinions page at this link http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions.

Case: 15-13970

Date Filed: 05/10/2016

Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 15-13970
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cr-20740-MGC-3

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RULEXY RODRIGUEZ-VAZQUEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(May 10, 2016)
Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Rulexy Rodriguez-Vazquez appeals his conviction for conspiracy to possess
with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of a mixture and substance

Case: 15-13970

Date Filed: 05/10/2016

Page: 2 of 3

containing a detectable amount of marijuana, arguing that the district court erred
by denying his motion to suppress evidence. The government argues that
Rodriguez-Vazquez’s unconditional guilty plea bars this appeal.
We review whether a voluntary unconditional guilty plea waives a
defendant’s ability to appeal adverse rulings of pre-trial motions de novo. See
United States v. Patti, 337 F.3d 1317, 1320, 1320 n.4 (11th Cir. 2003). By
entering a voluntary unconditional guilty plea, a defendant waives all
non-jurisdictional defects in the proceedings. Id. at 1320. We will not consider a
defendant’s challenge to the district court’s denial of a motion to suppress if that
issue was not preserved in a conditional plea. United States v. McCoy, 477 F.2d
550, 551 (5th Cir. 1973); see also United States v. Wai-Keung, 115 F.3d 874, 877
(11th Cir. 1997) (declining to discuss a suppression issue that was beyond the
challenges that the conditional guilty plea permitted).
A defendant who wishes to preserve appellate review of a non-jurisdictional
defect while at the same time pleading guilty can do so only by entering a
conditional plea in accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2). United States v.
Pierre, 120 F.3d 1153, 1155 (11th Cir. 1997). The conditional plea must be in
writing and must be consented to by the court and by the government. Id. A party
seeking to raise a claim or issue on appeal must plainly and prominently so
indicate; otherwise, the issue—even if properly preserved at trial—will be
2

Case: 15-13970

Date Filed: 05/10/2016

Page: 3 of 3

considered abandoned. United States v. Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273, 1284 n.8 (11th
Cir. 2003).
Rodriguez-Vazquez entered into an unconditional guilty plea. He does not
dispute on appeal that his plea was knowing and voluntary, and so has abandoned
any such challenge. See Jernigan, 341 F.3d at 1284 n.8. Because he voluntarily
entered into an unconditional guilty plea, he has waived his right to challenge the
district court’s denial of his motion to suppress. See McCoy, 477 F.2d at 551.
AFFIRMED.

3