Case: 13-13485 Date Filed: 02/26/2014 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-13485
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-20067-JIC-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RICHARD MARCEL MAZARD,
a.k.a. Richard Mazar,
a.k.a. Richard M. Mazard,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(February 26, 2014)
Before WILSON, PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 13-13485 Date Filed: 02/26/2014 Page: 2 of 2
Richard Marcel Mazard appeals his sentence of 30 months of imprisonment
following his plea of guilty to robbery. See 18 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Mazard argues
that his sentence at the low end of the advisory guideline range is substantively
unreasonable. We affirm.
Mazard invited any error involving the reasonableness of his sentence. “It is
a cardinal rule of appellate review that a party may not challenge as error a ruling
or other trial proceeding invited by that party.” United States v. Love, 449 F.3d
1154, 1157 (11th Cir. 2006) (quoting United States v. Ross, 131 F.3d 970, 988
(11th Cir. 1997)). At his sentencing hearing, Mazard “ask[ed] for, at a maximum, .
. . [a sentence of] 30 months” and later argued that “30 months . . .[was] very
significant, a long period of time . . . but appropriate in this case.” Mazard is
barred from challenging the reasonableness of a sentence at the low end of the
guideline range that he requested.
We AFFIRM Mazard’s sentence.
2