IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11167
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FREDDIE EARL HAYES,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:00-CR-47-1-C
--------------------
April 2, 2001
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Freddie Earl Hayes seeks to appeal his conviction for
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and his sentence of
105 months’ imprisonment. He argues that the felon-in-possession
statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), is unconstitutional. The
Government argues that Hayes has waived his right to raise this
issue on appeal. Hayes has not filed a reply brief addressing
the waiver-of-appeal issue.
A defendant may, as part of a valid plea agreement, waive
his statutory right to appeal. United States v. Melancon, 972
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-11167
-2-
F.2d 566, 567-68 (5th Cir. 1992); United States v. Henderson, 72
F.3d 463, 464-65 (5th Cir. 1995). The record reflects that Hayes
knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal, with
limited exceptions, in his plea agreement. See United States v.
Portillo, 18 F.3d 290, 292-93 (5th Cir. 1994). Thus, we decline
to address Hayes’ arguments pertaining to the purported
unconstitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g).
Hayes also argues that the district court erred in
increasing his base offense level by four pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 2K2.1(b)(5). Hayes’ arguments are foreclosed by our decision
in United States v. Condren, 18 F.3d 1190, 1191 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.