UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 95-11054
(Summary Calendar)
_________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FRANCISCO PUGA,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Texas
(3:95-CR-131-T)
August 8, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Francisco Puga appeals his sentence following his guilty plea
to conspiring and aiding and abetting the conspiracy to commit
interstate theft by carrier and breaking the seal of carrier. The
Government argues that Puga waived his right to appeal his sentence
on the ground raised. Because neither party submitted a transcript
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Local Rule 47.5.4.
of the guilty plea hearing, this court will not address the
question of waiver and will address the merits. See United States
v. Portillo, 18 F.3d 290, 293 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.
___, 115 S. Ct. 244, 130 L. Ed. 2d. 166 (1994).
Puga argues that the district court erred in finding that his
prior state convictions were “unrelated” and that they therefore
counted separately under § 4A1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines in
determining his criminal history score. Puga’s argument is without
merit, for he has only demonstrated that the convictions resulted
in concurrent sentences. He has failed to provide any proof that
the cases were consolidated, as he argues. See United States v.
Fitzhugh, 984 F.2d 143, 147 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 895,
114 S. Ct. 259, 126 L. Ed. 2d 211 (1993) (stating that fact that
prior convictions resulted in concurrent sentences is not enough by
itself to establish that cases are “related” for purposes of
U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2); United States v. Castro-Perpia, 932 F.2d 364,
366 (5th Cir. 1991) (same).
For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM Puga’s sentence.
-2-