Opinion

United States v. Brown

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
May 4, 2023
Status
Unpublished
Nature of suit
Direct Criminal
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 23.2%

The opinion

Case: 22-60354 Document: 00516738117 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/04/2023

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

____________ United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

No. 22-60354 May 4, 2023

Summary Calendar

____________ Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Marvin Temple Brown,

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:21-CR-50-4

______________________________

Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: *

Marvin Temple Brown appeals the 240-month sentence he received

after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute a

mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin and a mixture

or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. Brown

challenges the district court’s sentence enhancements for possession of

_____________________

*

This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 22-60354 Document: 00516738117 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/04/2023

No. 22-60354

firearms during the offense and for his role as a manager or supervisor, the

drug quantity calculation, and the denial of a reduction for acceptance of

responsibility. The Government moves to dismiss the appeal or,

alternatively, for summary affirmance based on the appeal waiver in Brown’s

plea agreement.

We review whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal de novo. United

States v. Winchel, 896 F.3d 387, 388 (5th Cir. 2018). The record

demonstrates that Brown’s appeal waiver was knowing and voluntary. See

United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746 n.2 (5th Cir. 2005). Under the

plain language of the waiver, his arguments challenging his sentence have

been waived. See United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 544 (5th Cir. 2005); see

also United States v. Alvarado-Casas, 715 F.3d 945, 955-56 (5th Cir. 2013).

Accordingly, the Government’s motion to dismiss the appeal is

GRANTED, and its alternative motion for summary affirmance is

DENIED.

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.