Case: 20-10946 Document: 00515935562 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/13/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
July 13, 2021
No. 20-10946
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Jesus Guerra-Sanchez,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:17-CR-341-5
Before Clement, Ho, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Jesus Guerra-Sanchez appeals the sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction of conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to
distribute a mixture or substance containing 500 grams or more of
methamphetamine. He argues that the district court erred in determining
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-10946 Document: 00515935562 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/13/2021
No. 20-10946
the quantity of methamphetamine attributable to him and in not applying a
downward departure or offense-level reduction based on his allegation that
he acted under duress. In response, the Government asks us to enforce the
appeal waiver in Guerra-Sanchez’s plea agreement.
“A defendant may waive his statutory right to appeal if the waiver is
knowing and voluntary.” United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746 (5th
Cir. 2005). Whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal is a question we review
de novo. United States v. Keele, 755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 2014). Our
assessment turns on “a two-step inquiry: (1) whether the waiver was knowing
and voluntary and (2) whether the waiver applies to the circumstances at
hand, based on the plain language of the agreement.” United States v. Bond,
414 F.3d 542, 544 (5th Cir. 2005).
The record reflects that Guerra-Sanchez was admonished pursuant to
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(1)(N) and that he “indicated that
he read and understood the [plea] agreement, which includes an explicit,
unambiguous waiver of appeal[.]” Bond, 414 F.3d at 544. Though Guerra-
Sanchez suggests that after his conviction he may have forgotten the waiver
or developed mistaken beliefs about it, he does not argue “that his ratification
of the plea agreement was anything but knowing and voluntary.” McKinney,
406 F.3d at 746. We accordingly conclude that the appeal waiver is valid and
that Guerra-Sanchez’s sentencing claims, which do not fall within an
exception to the waiver, are barred. See id.; Bond, 414 F.3d at 544.
In conjunction with his challenge to the appeal waiver, Guerra-
Sanchez argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Because
the record is not sufficiently developed to permit a fair consideration of this
claim, we decline to consider it without prejudice to collateral review. See
United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v.
2
Case: 20-10946 Document: 00515935562 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/13/2021
No. 20-10946
Bishop, 629 F.3d 462, 469 (5th Cir. 2010) (noting that a motion pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2255 is the preferred vehicle for claims of ineffective assistance).
For these reasons, the appeal is DISMISSED.
3