Background
Paul Lujan appealed his sentence following a guilty plea for possession with intent to distribute cocaine. He argued that his appeal waiver was invalid and that his sentence was unconstitutional.
The court’s reasoning
The court determined that Lujan’s arguments were foreclosed by existing Fifth Circuit precedent, specifically citing United States v. Hernandez. Therefore, summary affirmance was appropriate.
Summary affirmance is thus appropriate.
United States v. Hernandez, 633 F.3d 370, 373–74 (5th Cir. 2011)
What it means going forward
The district court’s judgment remains in effect, and Lujan’s sentence stands as imposed.