United States v. Crosby
United States v. Crosby
Opinion
Case: 21-60063 Document: 00516000241 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/31/2021
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 21-60063 August 31, 2021 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Bruce Crosby, Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi No. 1:18-CR-137-1
Before Smith, Stewart, and Graves, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:* Bruce Crosby appeals the within-guidelines sentence for his convic- tion of possessing methamphetamine with intent to distribute. He contends that the sentence is procedurally unreasonable because the district court’s guidelines calculations relied on a determination of drug quantity not sup-
* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opin- ion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-60063 Document: 00516000241 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/31/2021
No. 21-60063
ported by the evidence. Seeking to enforce the waiver in Crosby’s plea agree- ment, the government moves to dismiss the appeal or, in the alternative, for summary affirmance.
Whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal is a question this court reviews de novo. United States v. Keele, 755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 2014). The question turns on “a two-step inquiry: (1) whether the waiver was knowing and voluntary and (2) whether the waiver applies to the circumstances at hand, based on the plain language of the agreement.” United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 544 (5th Cir. 2005). The record reflects that both conditions are met. Crosby avers that at the time he entered into the plea agreement, it was not possible for him knowingly to waive the right to challenge his sen- tence. That argument is unavailing. See United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 567−68 (5th Cir. 1992).
Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED, the alternative motion for summary affirmance is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.