USA v. Noe Lira-Miranda
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-40963 Dismissed ] Judge: CDK , Judge: EGJ , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 12/15/2014 for Appellant Noe Lira-Miranda [13-40963]
Date Filed: 11/24/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
November 24, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:13-CR-235
Before KING, JOLLY, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Noe Lira-Miranda appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea
conviction to conspiracy to transport illegal aliens. The guilty plea was made
pursuant to a plea agreement wherein Lira-Miranda waived the right to appeal
his sentence, reserving only the right to appeal a sentence above the statutory
maximum or an upward departure not requested by the Government. LiraMiranda was sentenced within the guidelines range to the statutory maximum
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Date Filed: 11/24/2014
of 120 months of imprisonment, to be followed by three years of supervised
release. On appeal, Lira-Miranda challenges the enhancements applied to his
sentence under U.S.S.G. §§ 2L1.1(b)(2)(B), 2L1.1(b)(5)(B), 2L1.1(b)(8)(A), and
3C1.1. His challenges to the application of sentence enhancements do not fall
within an exception to the appeal waiver because the sentence is not an upward
departure. See United States v. Gaitan, 171 F.3d 222, 222-24 (5th Cir. 1999).
The Government invokes the appeal waiver and seeks a dismissal of the
A review of the record indicates that the appeal waiver was
unambiguous, that Lira-Miranda knowingly and voluntarily waived his right
to appeal his sentence, and that his claims of error regarding his sentence are
barred by the appeal waiver. See United States v. Keele, 755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th
Cir. 2014), cert. filed, No. 14-256 (Aug. 29, 2014). Additionally, the district
court’s statements at sentencing did not negate the appeal waiver. See United
States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 568 (5th Cir. 1992). Furthermore, a district
court does not have the authority to accept a plea agreement while striking the
appeal waiver provision. See United States v. Serrano-Lara, 698 F.3d 841, 84445 (5th Cir. 2012).
Accordingly, 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?