United States v. Easter

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-11134
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JANET LENELL EASTER,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CR-241-1-A
--------------------
April 11, 2002
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Janet Lenell Easter appeals her conviction following entry
of a guilty plea to a charge of possession with intent to
distribute more than fifty grams of cocaine base. Easter
contends that the district court participated in the plea
negotiations in violation of FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(e)(1).
Rule 11, FED. R. CRIM. P., requires the district court to
participate actively in discussions after a plea agreement has
been disclosed. United States v. Crowell, 60 F.3d 199, 203 (5th
Cir. 1995). However, FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(e)(1) absolutely

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 01-11134
-2-
prohibits a district court from participating in or interfering
with plea negotiations. Id. Although the district court may
state reasons for accepting or rejecting a plea agreement, it may
not suggest plea agreements that might be acceptable. Id.
The district court’s post guilty plea consideration of the
potential sentence Easter faced under the plea agreement as
compared to the punishment that Easter would have faced for her
conduct as a whole did not constitute participation in plea
negotiations in violation of FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(e)(1). See
Crowell, 60 F.3d at 203-04. The judgment of the district court
is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --