IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-30276
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAMES ARNOLD, III,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 00-CR-207-1-F
January 14, 2002
Before GARWOOD, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
James Arnold, III, wishes to appeal the sentence imposed
following his plea of guilty to one count of bank robbery in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). His notice of appeal was filed
late and the district court denied his motion for leave to file a
late notice of appeal.
Arnold argues that the district court erred in denying his
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under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.
motion to file a late notice of appeal because it conducted an
incomplete inquiry into whether the delay was caused by excusable
neglect. Arnold seeks only to challenge the district court’s
application of the Sentencing Guidelines and the resultant
sentence.
Arnold in his signed written plea agreement made an express,
informed and knowing waiver of his right to appeal except in the
case where the sentence imposed exceeded the statutory maximum or
where the sentence “constitutes an upward departure from the
Guideline range deemed most applicable by the sentencing court.”
This was also fully explained to him by the district court at the
Rule 11 hearing. Because neither of the two stated conditions are
implicated by the sentence imposed by the district court, this
court is precluded from reviewing this issue. See United States v.
Gonzalez, 259 F.3d 355, 358 (5th Cir. 2001). Because the issue he
seeks to raise on appeal is precluded from review, remand for
consideration of the timeliness of the appeal notice would be
futile. See United States v. Alvarez, 210 F.3d 309, 310 (5th Cir.
2000).
APPEAL DISMISSED
2