United States v. Arizmendi-Moreno , 598 F. App'x 601 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                              FILED
    United States Court of Appeals
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS       Tenth Circuit
    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT                        March 23, 2015
    Elisabeth A. Shumaker
    Clerk of Court
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.                                                         No. 14-1429
    (D.C. No. 1:13-CR-00160-PAB-17)
    MARTIN ARIZMENDI-MORENO,                                    (D. Colo.)
    a/k/a Chaleco,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
    Before GORSUCH, HOLMES, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges.
    Martin Arizmendi-Moreno entered into a plea agreement that included a
    waiver of his right to appeal. He pleaded guilty to use of a communication facility to
    facilitate a felony drug transaction in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b) and (d)(1) and
    was sentenced to forty-eight months of imprisonment. Despite the appeal waiver, he
    appealed. Citing United States v. Hahn, 
    359 F.3d 1315
    (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc)
    *
    This panel has determined that oral argument would not materially assist the
    determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The
    case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment
    is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata,
    and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent
    with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
    (per curiam), the government moves to enforce the appeal waiver. We grant the
    motion and dismiss the appeal.
    In evaluating a motion to enforce a waiver, we consider: “(1) whether the
    disputed appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate rights; (2) whether
    the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights; and (3) whether
    enforcing the waiver would result in a miscarriage of justice.” 
    Id. at 1325.
    Mr. Arizmendi-Moreno, through counsel, concedes that the appeal waiver contained
    in the plea agreement is enforceable. Upon our independent review of the plea
    agreement and plea and sentencing hearing transcripts, we conclude that
    Mr. Arizmendi-Moreno cannot establish any of the applicable exceptions to
    enforcement of the appeal waiver and therefore the appeal waiver should be enforced.
    Accordingly, we grant the motion to enforce, and we dismiss this appeal
    Entered for the Court
    Per Curiam
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-1429

Citation Numbers: 598 F. App'x 601

Judges: Gorsuch, Holmes, Matheson, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 3/23/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024