USA v. Ledezma-Ledezma, No. 05-50082 (5th Cir. 2006)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 2, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-50082 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus HOMAR LEDEZMA-LEDEZMA, Defendant-Appellant. -------------------Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-1656-ALL -------------------Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Homar Ledezma-Ledezma (Ledezma) appeals his guilty-plea conviction of importing into the United States more than 50 kilograms of a mixture and substance containing marijuana. 21 U.S.C. ยงยง 952(a), 960(a)(1) and (b)(3). See Ledezma argues that his guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered because the magistrate judge who conducted his plea colloquy failed to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(1)(D) by informing him that he had a right to the representation of counsel at trial, and, if necessary, to have the court appoint an * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 05-50082 -2attorney for him. Ledezma did not challenge in district court the voluntariness of his plea or the magistrate judge s compliance with Rule 11. Accordingly, review is for plain error. See United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 59 (2002). Ledezma has met the first two prongs of the plain error analysis by establishing a Rule 11 error that is clear and obvious. See id. at 59. Nevertheless, Ledezma has not met the third prong of the plain error analysis by showing that the magistrate judge s Rule 11 error affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74, 82-83 (2004). A review of the record as a whole reveals no reasonable probability that, but for the error, Ledezma would not have entered his guilty plea. See id. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
