United States v. Serrato , 336 F. App'x 846 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                                                                         FILED
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                 July 14, 2009
    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT               Elisabeth A. Shumaker
    Clerk of Court
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.                                                    No. 09-4054
    (D.C. No. 2:06-CR-00851-TS-1)
    RUBEN SERRATO,                                         (D. Utah)
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
    Before TACHA, TYMKOVICH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.
    This matter is before the court on the government’s motion to enforce the
    appeal waiver contained in defendant’s plea agreement. The motion is filed
    pursuant to United States v. Hahn, 
    359 F.3d 1315
     (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc)
    (per curiam). In response, defendant, through counsel, states that summary
    disposition of the direct appeal is appropriate. Resp. at 2, 7. Defendant does not
    *
    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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the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. It may be cited,
    however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and
    10th Cir. R. 32.1.
    concede that he knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights, or that
    enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. Id. at 2-6; see
    Hahn, 
    359 F.3d at 1325
     (identifying factors used to determine if appeal waiver is
    valid). Rather, he contends these issues, and any potential
    ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims, would be better addressed in a collateral
    proceeding. Resp. at 2-7.
    Accordingly, the government’s motion is GRANTED, and the appeal is
    DISMISSED.
    ENTERED FOR THE COURT
    PER CURIAM
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-4054

Citation Numbers: 336 F. App'x 846

Judges: Holmes, Per Curiam, Tacha, Tymkovich

Filed Date: 7/14/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023