United States v. Regester , 203 F. App'x 684 ( 2006 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 27, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-30305
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOHN R REGESTER, II, also known as Johnny Rotten,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 3:05-CR-30019
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
John Regester appeals his guilty-plea conviction of
conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute
methamphetamine. Regester faced a mandatory minimum sentence of
10 years because of a prior drug felony conviction. See 21
U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(viii). The district court sentenced
Regester to 262 months of imprisonment. Regester argues that the
district court erred when it failed to adequately inform him of
the 10-year mandatory minimum sentence as required by FED.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-30305
-2-
R. CRIM. P. 11(b)(1)(I). Where, as here, a defendant fails to
object to a Rule 11 error in the district court, this court
reviews for plain error. United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 59
(2002).
The district court informed Regester at his plea hearing
that “[t]he maximum possible penalty for Count 1 is a term of
imprisonment of not less that ten years nor more than
life. . . .” Although the district court’s statement at the
guilty-plea hearing could have been more artfully phrased, it
notified Regester that he faced a sentence of 10 years to life.
Moreover, a notice the Government filed prior to the plea hearing
and the presentence report both correctly reflected that Regester
faced a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison.
Regester does not argue or allege that he would have pleaded
differently had the court’s admonition been clearer. See United
States v. Vasquez-Bernal, 197 F.3d 169, 171 (5th Cir. 1999).
Considering the record as a whole, Vonn, 535 U.S. at 59, the
district court’s failure to accurately advise Regester of the
mandatory minimum sentence does not constitute plain error. The
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.