United States v. Adeodato Ibarra-Alcarez , 672 F. App'x 473 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 15-51156      Document: 00513825251         Page: 1    Date Filed: 01/06/2017
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 15-51156                                 FILED
    Summary Calendar                         January 6, 2017
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    ADEODATO IBARRA-ALCAREZ, also known as Cesar Islas-Alvarez,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. 3:96-CR-189-1
    Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Adeodato Ibarra-Alcarez, federal prisoner # 15151-086, is serving a 293-
    month sentence after a jury convicted him of conspiracy to possess with intent
    to distribute marijuana and three counts of possessing marijuana with intent
    to distribute. He appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to compel the
    Government to file a motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to Federal Rule
    of Criminal Procedure 35(b). Ibarra-Alcarez argues that the Government was
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 15-51156    Document: 00513825251     Page: 2   Date Filed: 01/06/2017
    No. 15-51156
    required to file a Rule 35(b) motion based upon his substantial assistance in
    providing information that led to the apprehension of drug traffickers.
    Ibarra-Alcarez does not argue that the Government’s refusal to file a
    Rule 35(b) motion was based on an unconstitutional motive. See United States
    v. Grant, 
    493 F.3d 464
    , 467 (5th Cir. 2007). He has also failed to show that the
    Government either was compelled to file a Rule 35(b) or bargained away its
    discretion concerning whether to file a Rule 35(b) motion. See United States v.
    Price, 
    95 F.3d 364
    , 368-69 & n.2 (5th Cir. 1996). Ibarra-Alcarez’s motion to
    compel “was unauthorized and without a jurisdictional basis.” United States
    v. Early, 
    27 F.3d 140
    , 141 (5th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, the judgment of the
    district court is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-51156

Citation Numbers: 672 F. App'x 473

Filed Date: 1/6/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023