USA v. Irvin Lawrence

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-20170 Dismissed ] Judge: JLW , Judge: PRO , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 03/06/2014 for Appellant Irvin Warren Lawrence; granting motion to dismiss appeal filed by Appellee USA [7536421-2] [13-20170]

Case: 13-20170

Document: 00512531543

Page: 1

Date Filed: 02/13/2014

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED

No. 13-20170
Summary Calendar

February 13, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
IRVIN WARREN LAWRENCE,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:12-CR-199-1
Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Irvin Warren Lawrence pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank
fraud and was sentenced to 51 months of imprisonment, at the top of the
applicable guidelines imprisonment range.

He also pleaded guilty to

aggravated identity theft, for which he received a consecutive 24-month prison
term. Lawrence now challenges the 51-month sentence he received on his
conspiracy conviction.

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-20170

Document: 00512531543

Page: 2

Date Filed: 02/13/2014

No. 13-20170
As part of his plea agreement, Lawrence waived his right to appeal his
conviction and sentence.

We enforce such waivers when knowing and

voluntary. United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 544 (5th Cir. 2005).

To the

extent Lawrence is claiming that he was misadvised about the waiver at the
re-arraignment hearing, he has failed to include the hearing transcript as part
of the record on appeal. See Fed. R. App. Pro. 10. More importantly, he has
wholly failed to raise any issue about the validity of his appeal waiver, 414
F.3d at 544, or brief any challenges to it despite acknowledging the existence
of the waiver and receiving the Government’s motion to dismiss based upon
the waiver (to which no response was filed). Accordingly, we conclude any such
challenge is waived. United States v. Reagan, 596 F.3d 251, 254 (5th Cir.
2010). 1 We GRANT the Government’s motion to dismiss.
APPEAL DISMISSED.

To the extent that Lawrence is claiming he reserved the right to appeal an upward
departure, nothing in the record suggests the sentence was the result of an upward
departure.
1

2