USA v. Carl Campbell

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-31092 Affirmed ] Judge: WED , Judge: FPB , Judge: ECP Mandate pull date is 07/14/2014 for Appellant Carl Timothy Campbell [13-31092]

Case: 13-31092

Document: 00512673952

Page: 1

Date Filed: 06/23/2014

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

No. 13-31092
Summary Calendar

FILED
June 23, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
CARL TIMOTHY CAMPBELL,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:12-CR-283
Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

Carl Timothy Campbell pleaded guilty to a marijuana-trafficking crime
and to possessing a firearm in furtherance of that crime. After the presentence
report (PSR) was released, Campbell moved to withdraw his guilty plea on the
ground that he had been misinformed about the likely sentencing range. The
district court denied the motion and sentenced Campbell to the statutory
maximum sentence of 60 months on the drug-trafficking count and a

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-31092

Document: 00512673952

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/23/2014

No. 13-31092
consecutive 63 months on the firearm count, which was three months above
the advisory guideline sentence. On appeal, Campbell contends that he should
have been allowed to withdraw his guilty plea and that the court made several
sentencing errors.
In denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea, the district court
properly applied the factors deemed relevant in United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d
339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984). None of the factors favored withdrawal, and
Campbell thus failed to “show a fair and just reason” for withdrawing the plea.
FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(d)(2)(B).
More significantly, the record shows that the plea was knowing and
voluntary, and that a waiver of appeal contained in the written plea agreement
was also knowing, voluntary, and valid. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(b)(1)(N);
United States v. Keele, 742 F.3d 192, 195 (5th Cir. 2014). Campbell thus waived
his right to appeal the sentence unless the sentence was above the statutory
maximum sentence. See United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 546 (5th Cir.
2005). Campbell was not sentenced above the statutory maximum sentence.
He thus waived his challenges to the sentence. See id. Because Campbell
raises no meritorious and unwaived claim, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

2