USA v. Michael Ford
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-30485 Dismissed ] Judge: JLW , Judge: ECP , Judge: PRO Mandate pull date is 04/11/2011 for Appellant Michael Ford [10-30485]
USA v. Michael Ford Case:
10-30485 Document: 00511417781 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/21/2011
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
No. 10-30485 Summary Calendar March 21, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MICHAEL LEE FORD, Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:09-CR-14-1
Before WIENER, PRADO and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Michael Lee Ford challenges his within-guidelines 60-month consecutive sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for possession of a firearm during a drug-trafficking offense. Ford contends that the language of the statute of conviction, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A), prohibits the imposition of a consecutive sentence when a defendant is subject to a greater minimum sentence. Because Ford was subject to a greater minimum sentence in connection with his conviction on another count for possession with the intent to distribute crack
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
Case: 10-30485 Document: 00511417781 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/21/2011 No. 10-30485 cocaine, he asserts that he should not have received the consecutive 60-month sentence. The Government seeks the enforcement of the appeal waiver
contained in Ford's plea agreement and requests the dismissal of this appeal. Ford does not challenge the validity of the appeal waiver or argue that any of its exceptions apply. The record shows that Ford's appeal waiver is valid. See United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746 (5th Cir. 2005). The Government seeks
enforcement of the waiver and dismissal of the appeal. See United States v. Story, 439 F.3d 226, 231 (5th Cir. 2006). Although a valid waiver does not implicate our jurisdiction, see id. at 230, Ford's appeal of his sentence is clearly barred by the waiver. Moreover, his argument is foreclosed by Supreme Court precedent in Abbott v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 18, 23 (2010). The appeal is DISMISSED.
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?