Filed: Jan. 14, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Case: 18-40247 Document: 00514794613 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/14/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 18-40247 January 14, 2019 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JIMENA FAVIOLA SALAZAR-ALANIS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:16-CR-178-6 Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judge
Summary: Case: 18-40247 Document: 00514794613 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/14/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 18-40247 January 14, 2019 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JIMENA FAVIOLA SALAZAR-ALANIS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:16-CR-178-6 Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges..
More
Case: 18-40247 Document: 00514794613 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/14/2019
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 18-40247 January 14, 2019
Summary Calendar
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JIMENA FAVIOLA SALAZAR-ALANIS,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:16-CR-178-6
Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Jimena Faviola Salazar-Alanis pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess
with intent to manufacture and distribute methamphetamine. Her plea
agreement provided that she waived her right to appeal her conviction or
sentence. She reserved the rights only to challenge a sentence that exceeded
the statutory maximum sentence and to assert ineffectiveness of counsel in a
collateral proceeding. However, she contends that her plea agreement and
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-40247 Document: 00514794613 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/14/2019
No. 18-40247
waiver are invalid because she received no benefit or consideration in exchange
for her plea. She also asserts that the advisory guideline range was incorrectly
calculated and that the judgment incorrectly states the crime of conviction.
We review the validity of the appeal waiver only for plain error because
Salazar-Alanis did not make any challenge to the validity of the agreement in
the district court. See Puckett v. United States,
556 U.S. 129, 133-34 (2009).
To establish plain error, Salazar-Alanis must show an error “that has not been
intentionally relinquished or abandoned,” that is “clear or obvious, rather than
subject to reasonable dispute,” and that has affected her substantial rights by
affecting the outcome of the proceedings.
Id. at 135. If she does that, we have
the discretion to correct the error if it “seriously affects the fairness, integrity
or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”
Id. (internal quotation marks,
citation, and amendment omitted).
Although general contract principles apply to plea agreements, we have
never expressly held that consideration is necessary to support a valid plea
bargain. See United States v. Smallwood,
920 F.2d 1231, 1239-40 (5th Cir.
1991). Salazar-Alanis cites general principles of contract law in a well-
expressed effort to establish that consideration is required and that it is
lacking in her case. Nonetheless, because no Fifth Circuit precedent supports
her novel contention, we decline to find clear or obvious error in the district
court’s acceptance of the plea agreement, where there was no contention that
it was invalid for lack of consideration or any other reason. See United States
v. Evans,
587 F.3d 667, 671 (5th Cir. 2009).
Accordingly, the plea agreement is enforceable. In addition, no exception
applies because Salazar-Alanis does not contend that the sentence exceeded
the statutory maximum sentence, and she does not attempt to raise a claim of
ineffective counsel. See United States v. McKinney,
406 F.3d 744, 746-47 (5th
2
Case: 18-40247 Document: 00514794613 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/14/2019
No. 18-40247
Cir. 2005). We therefore decline to consider her arguments that she should not
have been assessed an aggravating-role increase and that the judgment
incorrectly states that she was convicted of possession with the intent to
manufacture as well as to distribute methamphetamine. See
id.
The judgment is AFFIRMED.
3