United States v. Bravo-Camargo , 186 F. App'x 831 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                                                                       F I L E D
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES CO URT O F APPEALS
    June 28, 2006
    FO R TH E TENTH CIRCUIT              Elisabeth A. Shumaker
    Clerk of Court
    U N ITED STA TES O F A M ER ICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.                                                  No. 06-2090
    (CR-05-2143-JC)
    O SCAR FER NA N D O                                  (D . N.M .)
    B RA V O -C AM A RG O ,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    OR D ER AND JUDGM ENT *
    Before H E N RY, O’BRIEN, and M cCO NNELL, Circuit Judges.
    The government has filed a motion to enforce the plea agreement with
    defendant Oscar Fernando Bravo-Camargo. In the agreement,
    M r. Bravo-Camargo waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence on the
    charge of possessing with intent to distribute 500 grams and more of cocaine.
    Defendant’s attorney does not oppose the motion to enforce. This court notified
    *
    This panel has determined unanimously 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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the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. The court
    generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
    and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
    M r. Bravo-Camargo that he could file a written opposition to the motion to
    enforce, but he did not do so.
    This court will enforce a criminal defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal
    so long as the following three elements are satisfied: (1) “the disputed appeal
    falls within the scope of the w aiver of appellate rights,” (2) the defendant’s
    waiver of his appellate rights was knowing and voluntary, and (3) enforcing the
    waiver w ill not result in a miscarriage of justice. United States v. Hahn, 
    359 F.3d 1315
    , 1325 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam). W e have carefully reviewed
    the transcript of the hearing at which M r. Bravo-Camargo entered his guilty plea.
    The presiding magistrate judge thoroughly review ed the terms of the waiver with
    M r. Bravo-Camargo. W e conclude that the Hahn factors have been satisfied.
    Accordingly, we GRANT the government’s motion to enforce the plea
    agreement and DISM ISS the appeal. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
    ENTERED FOR THE COURT
    PER CURIAM
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-2090

Citation Numbers: 186 F. App'x 831

Judges: Henry, McCONNELL, O'Brien, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 6/28/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023