USA v. Ronald Pearson, No. 09-10518 (5th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 09-10518 Document: 00511083783 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/19/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 09-10518 Summary Calendar April 19, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RONALD C. PEARSON, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-369-1 Before KING, STEWART, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Ronald C. Pearson appeals from his guilty plea conviction and sentence for receipt of child pornography through interstate and foreign commerce. Pearson argues that (1) his guilty plea was invalid due to his lack of understanding regarding the consequences of his plea, (2) his appeal waiver is not enforceable because he could not waive his right to challenge a sentence that had not yet been imposed, (3) the imposed sentence was substantively unreasonable, and * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 09-10518 Document: 00511083783 Page: 2 No. 09-10518 Date Filed: 04/19/2010 (4) the supervised release conditions are unconstitutionally overbroad and greater than necessary. Before this court, Pearson filed a motion to modify and supplement the record to rebut statements by the Government regarding his conduct while he was on mission trips in the Phillippines. The Government s negative statements about Pearson come from the Pre-Sentence Report, to which no objection was lodged in the district court. Information about Pearson s good works in the Phillippines was presented at length to the district court and taken into account in the sentencing process. The proposed material is untimely and cumulative, so the motion is denied. Pearson has failed to show reversible plain error regarding his guilty plea. See United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 58-59 (2002). Moreover, the record shows that Pearson s appeal waiver provision was valid and should be enforced. See United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 567-68 (5th Cir. 1992). Pearson was properly admonished regarding his guilty plea and his appeal waiver. Pearson s cooperation with respect to another offender and others was also taken into account in granting a downward departure on his sentence. In any event, his remaining arguments are barred by the appeal waiver provision. MOTION TO MODIFY AND SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD DENIED; AFFIRMED. 2
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.
