USA v. Edward Gladney, No. 12-20700 (5th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-20700 Document: 00512414680 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/21/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 12-20700 Summary Calendar October 21, 2013 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. EDWARD JORODGE GLADNEY, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:10-CR-735-1 Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Edward Jorodge Gladney seeks to appeal the 60-year sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to four counts of producing child pornography and one count of advertising child pornography. In his plea agreement he waived his right to appeal, but he argues that the waiver is invalid because he was not sufficiently advised of the breadth and effect of the waiver. The district court accurately explained the terms and consequences of the waiver in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(1)(N), 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-20700 Document: 00512414680 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/21/2013 No. 12-20700 Gladney stated on the record, under oath, in open court that he understood the waiver. His contention now that he did not really understand the waiver does not invalidate it. See United States v. Jacobs, 635 F.3d 778, 781 (5th Cir. 2011). Gladney s challenge to the court s fully adequate explanation of the waiver is frivolous because it involves no legal points arguable on their merits and fails to make any colorable showing of error, plain or otherwise. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); see 5TH CIR. RULE 42.2 (providing that an appeal will be dismissed if it is frivolous and entirely without merit ). Because the waiver is valid, we do not consider Gladney s challenge to the substantive reasonableness of his sentence. See Jacobs, 635 F.3d at 783. The appeal is DISMISSED. 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.
