United States v. Paul Alvarez , 361 F. App'x 618 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 09-50570     Document: 00511007513          Page: 1    Date Filed: 01/19/2010
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    January 19, 2010
    No. 09-50570
    Summary Calendar                    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    PAUL JASON ALVAREZ, also known as Jason Alvarez,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. 7:08-CR-219-1
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, CLEMENT and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Pursuant to a plea agreement, Paul Jason Alvarez pleaded guilty to one
    count of conspiring to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute 50
    grams or more of methamphetamine.                He was sentenced to 210 months of
    imprisonment and five years of supervised release. More than 40 days after the
    entry of judgment, Alvarez filed a notice of appeal and a motion for an extension
    of time to file an appeal. The district court denied the motion per F ED. R. A PP.
    P. 4(b)(4).
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 09-50570    Document: 00511007513 Page: 2         Date Filed: 01/19/2010
    No. 09-50570
    Counsel appointed to represent Alvarez has filed a motion to withdraw.
    In his response to counsel’s motion, Alvarez moves for the appointment of new
    counsel.
    This court can dismiss an appeal during consideration of an interlocutory
    motion if the appeal “is frivolous and entirely without merit.” 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2.
    Alvarez did not file a notice of appeal within 10 days after the entry of the
    criminal judgment. See F ED. R. A PP. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). His motion for an extension
    of time to file an appeal was filed beyond the 30-day time limit for extending the
    appeal period under F ED. R. A PP. P. 4(b)(4). Thus, the district court did not err
    in enforcing the time limitations set forth in F ED. R. A PP. P. 4(b), and this court
    may not reverse its decision to do so. See United States v. Leijano-Cruz, 
    473 F.3d 571
    , 574 (5th Cir. 2006). Because the instant appeal is without arguable merit,
    the appeal is dismissed as frivolous, counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted,
    and Alvarez’s motion for the appointment of new counsel is denied. See 5 TH C IR.
    R. 42.2.
    APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED
    IN PART.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-50570

Citation Numbers: 361 F. App'x 618

Judges: Clement, Higginbotham, Per Curiam, Southwick

Filed Date: 1/20/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023