USA v. Ashlea Brown

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-10312 Dismissed ] Judge: WED , Judge: JES , Judge: LHS Mandate pull date is 01/05/2011 for Appellant Ashlea Danielle Brown; denying motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellee USA [6623249-2]; denying motion to extend time to file appellee's brief filed by Appellee USA [6623249-3] [10-10312]

USA v. Ashlea Brown ase: 10-10312 C

Document: 00511322038 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/15/2010

Doc. 0

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 10-10312 S u m m a r y Calendar December 15, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

U N IT E D STATES OF AMERICA, P la in t if f -A p p e lle e , versu s A S H L E A DANIELLE BROWN, D e fe n d a n t -A p p e lla n t .

A p p e a l from the United States District Court fo r the Northern District of Texas N o . 4:09-CR-151-1

B e fo r e DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:*

A s h le a Brown appeals the 37-month sentence imposed following her guilty p le a conviction of bank robbery. She argues that the district court lacked the
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
*

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-10312 Document: 00511322038 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/15/2010 No. 10-10312 a u t h o r it y to order that her sentence be served consecutively to state court sent e n c e s that had not yet been imposed, but she concedes that the issue is forec lo s e d by United States v. Brown, 920 F.2d 1212, 1216-17 (5th Cir.1991), abrog a te d on other grounds, United States v. Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2 0 0 6 ). The government moves to dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver p r o v is io n in Brown's plea agreement or, under Brown, for summary affirmance. The government alternatively moves for an extension of time to file a brief. C o n t r a r y to Brown's argument, she is not entitled to appeal based on the e x c e p t io n to her waiver for appeals of sentences exceeding the statutory maxim u m , because her sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum term of 20 y e a r s . See 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a); United States v. Cortez, 413 F.3d 502, 503 (5th C ir . 2005). Thus, we do not address the merits of Brown's challenge to her senten ce. B e c a u s e Brown's appeal is barred by her appeal waiver, the motion to dism is s the appeal is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. The motions for s u m m a r y affirmance and for an extension of time to file a brief are DENIED as u nn ecessary.

2