Opinion · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

U.S. v. TENORIO-TAPIA, 275 Fed.Appx. 539 (7th Cir. 2008)

United States, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin TENORIO-TAPIA,also known as Mauro Agustin Tenorio-Tapia, Defendant-Appellant., 275 F. App'x 539 (7th Cir. 2008)

Type
Opinion
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
2008-04-28
Topic
general

U.S. v. TENORIO-TAPIA, 275 Fed.Appx. 539 (7th Cir. 2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin TENORIO-TAPIA,also known as Mauro Agustin Tenorio-Tapia, Defendant-Appellant. No. 06-4094.United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.Submitted April 28, 2008.[fn*] Decided April 28, 2008. [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.][fn*] After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); Cir.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed U.S. v. TENORIO-TAPIA, 275 Fed.Appx. 539 (7th Cir. 2008). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

U.S. v. TENORIO-TAPIA,275 Fed.Appx. 539(7th Cir. 2008)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin TENORIO-TAPIA,
also known as Mauro Agustin Tenorio-Tapia, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-4094.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted April 28, 2008.fn*
Decided April 28, 2008.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. No. 06 CR 40017. J. Phil Gilbert, Judge.
Kit R. Morrissey, Office of the United States Attorney, Criminal Division, Fairview Heights, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Raymond P. Bolourtchi, Cofman, Wichmer, Bolourtchi Bernhardt, St. Louis, MO, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge, JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge.
Order
Agustin Tenorio-Tapia pleaded guilty to reentering the United States without permission, following his removal, in violation of8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends on appeal that his sentence of 41 months' imprisonment is excessive because the district court miscalculated his offense level.

As part of a plea agreement, Tenorio-Tapia waived the right to appeal his sentence unless "the sentence imposed is in excess of the Sentencing Guidelines (as determined by the Court or any applicable statutory minimum [sic], whichever is greater)". In exchange for this concession the prosecutor asked the district judge to give Tenorio-Tapia a sentence at the low end of the range, which the judge did. (The range calculated by the presentence report, which was adopted by the district judge, is 41 to 51 months.)

Tenorio-Tapia's brief on appeal ignores his waiver. The United States filed a brief invoking the waiver and asking us to dismiss the appeal. Tenorio-Tapia did not file a reply brief, and we cannot see how the appeal can be reconciled with the waiver. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed on the basis of Tenorio-Tapia's waiver.
  1. [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ↩
  2. After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. See Fed.R.App.P.34(a); Cir. R. 34(f). ↩