United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 28, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10879
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MANUEL CHAIREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:03-CR-6-ALL-A
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Manuel Chairez appeals his guilty plea conviction and
sentence for being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm.
On appeal, Chairez argues that his verbal motion to withdraw his
guilty plea should have been granted because his plea was not
voluntary. The district court’s decision was not an abuse of
discretion as Chairez has failed to show a fair and just reason
for requesting the withdrawal of his guilty plea. See United
States v. Carr, 740 F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-10879
-2-
Chairez also argues that the district court erred in
applying the enhancement provision found in § 2K2.1(b)(5) of the
Sentencing Guidelines, because there was no evidence that Chairez
possessed a firearm in connection with another felony offense.
After a thorough review of the record and the applicable law of
this Circuit, we hold that the district court did not clearly err
in applying the enhancement of § 2K2.1(b)(5), because there was
sufficient evidence to prove that Chairez possessed a firearm in
connection with a felony offense within the meaning of
§ 2K2.1(b)(5). United States v. Munoz, 150 F.3d 401, 416 (5th
Cir. 1998); United States v. Condren, 18 F.3d 1190, 1193, 1199-
1200 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Armstead, 114 F.3d 504,
512 (5th Cir. 1997).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.