United States v. Jorge Mosquera , 512 F. App'x 429 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 12-20177       Document: 00512145918         Page: 1     Date Filed: 02/18/2013
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    February 18, 2013
    No. 12-20177
    Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    JORGE GAMBOA MOSQUERA, also known as Jorge Mosuera Gamboa, also
    known as Jorge Mosqueda Gamboa, also known as Jorge Gamboa-Mosquera,
    also known as Fidel Lopez,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:11-CR-673-1
    Before JONES, DENNIS, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Jorge Gamboa Mosquera appeals his guilty plea conviction for illegal
    reentry into the United States after deportation following an aggravated felony
    conviction. He asserts that his guilty plea was unknowing and involuntary
    because the district court failed to advise him – or obtain a waiver of – his right
    to a jury trial, to plead not guilty, to be represented by counsel at trial and at
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-20177      Document: 00512145918      Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/18/2013
    No. 12-20177
    every other stage of the proceedings, and at trial to confront and cross-examine
    adverse witnesses, to be protected from compelled self incrimination, and to
    testify and present evidence. The Government and Gamboa Mosquera have filed
    a joint motion to summarily vacate the guilty plea and remand the case for
    further proceedings in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief in light of these omissions.
    Because Gamboa Mosquera did not object to these errors in the district court,
    review is limited to plain error. See United States v. Vonn, 
    535 U.S. 55
    , 58-59
    (2002).
    A review of the record confirms that the district court did not advise
    Gamboa Mosquera of the aforementioned rights. These errors are obvious
    because the admonishments are specifically required by Rule 11 of the Federal
    Rules of Criminal Procedure. See United States v. Aderholt, 
    87 F.3d 740
    , 744
    (5th Cir. 1996). However, Gamboa Mosquera does not contend and there is no
    indication in the record that he wanted to go to trial or that he had any defense
    to the illegal reentry charge that he might have asserted at trial. He does not
    argue that, but for the above errors of the district court, he would not have
    pleaded guilty and, therefore, he has not shown that these errors affected his
    substantial rights. See United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 
    542 U.S. 74
    , 83 (5th
    Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we DENY the joint motion, DISPENSE with further
    briefing, and AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-20177

Citation Numbers: 512 F. App'x 429

Judges: Dennis, Haynes, Jones, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 2/18/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/6/2023