USA v. Melecio Flores, No. 12-1829 (7th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted October 18, 2012 Decided October 19, 2012 Before JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge No. 12 1829 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. v. No. 1:10 CR 00159 004 MELECIO FLORES, Defendant Appellant. William T. Lawrence, Judge. O R D E R Melecio Flores pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), conspiracy to launder drug proceeds, 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h), (a)(1)(A)(i), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, id. § 924(c). As part of a written plea agreement, Flores waived the right to appeal his convictions and sentences on any ground. In exchange the government dropped other charges and agreed to recommend total imprisonment not to exceed 300 months. Based on a No. 12 1829 Page 2 total offense level of 41 and a criminal history category of I, the district court calculated a guidelines imprisonment range of 324 to 405 months but ultimately imposed a total of 216 months. Flores filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed counsel asserts that the possible appellate claims are frivolous and seeks to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Flores has not filed a response objecting to his lawyer s submission, see CIR. R. 51(b), but he did inform counsel that he stands by his guilty pleas. Counsel thus properly omits from his Anders brief any discussion of the plea colloquy or the voluntariness of Floresʹs guilty pleas. See United States v. Konczak, 683 F.3d 348, 349 (7th Cir. 2012); United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 670 71 (7th Cir. 2002). Floresʹs broad waiver of the right to appeal makes this case frivolous. An appeal waiver stands or falls with the guilty plea or plea agreement, United States v. Sakellarion, 649 F.3d 634, 638 39 (7th Cir. 2011); United States v. Cole, 569 F.3d 774, 776 (7th Cir. 2009), and since Flores does not seek to have his pleas vacated or challenge his plea agreement, his appeal waiver must be enforced. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
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.
