United States v. Castro-Alcala

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedAugust 30, 1999
Docket98-41427
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Castro-Alcala (United States v. Castro-Alcala) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Castro-Alcala, (5th Cir. 1999).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-41427 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

NICANDRO CASTRO-ALCALA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 98-CR-424-1 - - - - - - - - - -

August 27, 1999

Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Nicandro Castro-Alcala (“Castro”) challenges his guilty-plea

conviction for illegal reentry of a deported alien, 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326. Castro contends that the district court erred by failing

to comply with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1) during rearraignment and

that the failure requires that his conviction be reversed.

This appeal is frivolous. In reviewing whether the district

court complied with the dictates of Rule 11, this court

“conduct[s] a straightforward, two-question `harmless error’

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 98-41427 -2-

analysis: (1) Did the sentencing court in fact vary from the

procedures required by Rule 11, and (2) if so, did such variance

affect substantial rights of the defendant?” United States v.

Johnson, 1 F.3d 296, 298 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc). Although he

acknowledges his argument is subject to harmless-error review,

counsel makes no argument that Castro’s substantial rights were

affected; accordingly, there is no reversible error. See id.

The appeal is without arguable merit and is therefore

frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983);

5th Cir. R. 42.2. Accordingly, it is DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Johnson
1 F.3d 296 (Fifth Circuit, 1993)
Howard v. King
707 F.2d 215 (Fifth Circuit, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Castro-Alcala, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-castro-alcala-ca5-1999.