US v. Ramiro Calixtro
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:15-cr-00068-F-3. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency . [16-4315]
Pg: 1 of 4
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (4:15-cr-00068-F-3)
March 14, 2017
Before FLOYD and
March 16, 2017
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jorgelina E. Araneda, ARANEDA & STROUD LAW GROUP, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant
United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 4
Ramiro Calixtro appeals from his criminal judgment after he
He received the statutory minimum 60-month
district court substantially complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11
in accepting Calixtro’s guilty plea.
file a brief.
The Government declined to
After careful review, we affirm.
Prior to accepting a guilty plea, a court must conduct a
determines that the defendant understands, the nature of the
penalty he faces, and the various rights he is relinquishing by
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(1); United States v.
DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116 (4th Cir. 1991).
The district court
supported by a sufficient factual basis, and not the result of
force, threats, or promises not contained in the plea agreement.
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(2)-(3); DeFusco, 949 F.2d at 119-20.
Because Calixtro did not move to withdraw his guilty plea
in the district court or otherwise preserve any allegation of
Rule 11 error, we review the plea colloquy for plain error.
Pg: 3 of 4
United States v. Sanya, 774 F.3d 812, 815 (4th Cir. 2014).
prevail on a claim of plain error, [Calixtro] must demonstrate
not only that the district court plainly erred, but also that
this error affected his substantial rights.”
Id. at 816.
the guilty plea context, a defendant establishes that an error
affected his substantial rights if he demonstrates a reasonable
probability that he would not have pleaded guilty but for the
supported by an independent factual basis, it did not develop it
on the record.
However, neither Calixtro nor the record suggest
Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not
plainly err in accepting Calixtro’s guilty plea.
a pro se brief stating that he did not wish to withdraw his
guilty plea and that he only requested review of his mandatory
There was no reversible error in the sentence
calculation or imposition.
In accordance with Anders, we have
meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore affirm Calixtro’s
Pg: 4 of 4
Calixtro requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes
that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move
Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?