Filed: Dec. 16, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10628 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GONZALO ARMANDO DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98-CR-228-1-Y - - - - - - - - - - December 15, 1999 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Gonzalo Armando Diaz pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10628 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GONZALO ARMANDO DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98-CR-228-1-Y - - - - - - - - - - December 15, 1999 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Gonzalo Armando Diaz pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to d..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-10628
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GONZALO ARMANDO DIAZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:98-CR-228-1-Y
- - - - - - - - - -
December 15, 1999
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Gonzalo Armando Diaz pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess
with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine.
He appeals his sentence arguing that his two prior convictions
for driving while intoxicated should not have been counted
towards his criminal history score and that he therefore should
have been granted a safety-valve adjustment pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§§ 2D1.1(b)(6) and 5C1.2.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 99-10628
-2-
Diaz’s argument regarding his prior convictions primarily
consists of his request for this court to depart from the Supreme
Court’s holding in Nichols v. United States,
511 U.S. 738, 746-48
(1994). The holding in Nichols is not relevant to the facts of
this case. Furthermore, if it were relevant, we could not depart
from Supreme Court precedent. We warn his court-appointed
counsel, R. Sam Pestinger, that pursuing frivolous appeals
invites sanctions. See United States v. Burleson,
22 F.3d 93, 95
(5th Cir. 1994).
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. See 5TH
CIR. R. 42.2.