IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-51128
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JEFFREY K. HEBERT,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-99-CR-51-1
--------------------
March 11, 2002
Before DUHÉ, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
Jeffrey K. Hebert appeals his guilty-plea conviction for money
laundering and conspiracy to possess amphetamine with intent to
distribute, violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) and 21 U.S.C. § 841,
846. He first argues that the Government breached the plea
agreement by not filing a U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 motion for downward
departure. Hebert is mistaken. The record reflects that the
Government did file such a motion in this case. Hebert thus has
not shown that the Government breached the plea agreement.
1
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
Hebert next argues that the district court erred by not
advising him of the proper maximum sentence that he could receive
and by not ensuring that he was aware of the nature of the charges
to which he was pleading. The rearraignment transcript controverts
this assertion. Moreover, Hebert’s plea agreement also
sufficiently informs him of the nature of the charges against him.
See United States v. Cuevas-Andrade, 232 F.3d 440, 444 (5th Cir.),
cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1748 (2001). Hebert also raises several
sentencing issues that are barred by the waiver-of-appeal provision
found in his plea agreement. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(c)(6); United
States v. Baty, 980 F.2d 977, 979 (5th Cir. 1992).
Hebert has not shown that he is entitled to relief on any of
the issues he raises. Accordingly, the judgment of the district
court is
AFFIRMED.
2