Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-16-03171/USCOURTS-ca10-16-03171-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

MONTGOMERY CARL AKERS, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 16-3171 

(D.C. No. 2:04-CR-20089-KHV-1) 

(D. Kan.)

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

 

Before BRISCOE, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges. 

 

 This matter is before the court on the government’s motion to enforce the 

appeal waiver contained in defendant Montgomery Carl Akers’ plea agreement. 

Akers argues that the government’s motion is untimely and fails to comply with the 

court’s rules. We grant the government’s motion and dismiss the appeal. 

 Akers first contends that the government’s motion to enforce his appeal waiver 

is untimely. A motion to enforce “must be filed within 20 days after: (i) the district 

 

* 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is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, 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. 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

August 30, 2016

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 16-3171 Document: 01019680226 Date Filed: 08/30/2016 Page: 1 
- 2 - 

court’s notice, pursuant to 10th Cir. R. 11.1, that the record is complete, or; (ii) the 

district court’s notice that it is transmitting the record pursuant to 10th Cir. R. 11.2.” 

10th Cir. R. 27.3(A)(3)(b). The district court noticed its transmission of the record 

on June 23, 2016. The government filed its motion to enforce on July 13, 2016. The 

government’s motion is timely. 

Akers also maintains that the government’s motion lacks a certificate of 

service. But the motion states that it “was electronically filed on July 13, 2016, with 

the Clerk of the Court by using the ECF system, which will send a copy of the Notice 

of Docket Activity to all ECF system participants as of the time of the filing, and a 

copy was sent via U.S. Mail to: Mr. Montgomery C. Akers.” Mot. to Enforce at 14. 

 Finally, Akers contends that the government’s motion should be denied based 

on its failure to comply with this court’s rules. A motion to enforce “must include 

copies of the plea agreement and copies of transcripts for both the plea hearing and 

the sentencing hearing.” 10th Cir. R. 27.3(A)(2)(b). Akers notes that the 

government filed with its motion the transcript from the final sentencing hearing held 

on November 20, 2006, but did not attach the transcripts from the previous 

sentencing proceedings held on July 18 and July 20, 2006. 

Akers asserts that these two additional sentencing transcripts are “crucial to his 

arguments to deny the government’s motion to enforce.” Resp. at 5. But he does not 

indicate what his arguments are or why they require citation to any sentencing 

transcript other than the transcript from the hearing in which the district court 

Appellate Case: 16-3171 Document: 01019680226 Date Filed: 08/30/2016 Page: 2 
- 3 - 

imposed his sentence. As we have previously noted, “Mr. Akers is no stranger to this 

court,” United States v. Akers, 377 F. App’x 834, 835 (10th Cir. 2010), nor is he 

unfamiliar with the available bases for challenging the enforcement of his appeal 

waiver, see United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1325 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) 

(per curiam). Akers has opposed the government’s motions to enforce his appeal 

waiver on at least five previous occasions. See United States v. Akers, 628 F. App’x 

560, 562-63 (10th Cir. 2015); United States v. Akers, Nos. 12-3123 & 12-3130, slip 

op. at 3-4 (10th Cir. Aug. 20, 2012); Akers, 377 F. App’x 834, 836-37 (10th Cir. 

2010); United States v. Akers, 317 F. App’x 798, 801-04 (10th Cir. 2009); United 

States v. Akers, 281 F. App’x 844, 845 (10th Cir. 2008). Akers’ conclusory assertion 

fails to demonstrate that he has suffered any prejudice from the government’s failure 

to file the entire sentencing-hearing transcript. Consequently, he has provided 

insufficient grounds for this court to deny the government’s motion for failure to 

comply with the court’s rules. 

Akers advances no other argument against enforcement of his appeal waiver. 

We therefore grant the government’s motion to enforce and dismiss the appeal. We 

deny Akers’ application to proceed on appeal without prepayment of fees and costs. 

Akers shall forthwith pay the full amount of the filing fee to the district court clerk. 

All other pending motions are dismissed as moot. 

 Entered for the Court 

 Per Curiam 

Appellate Case: 16-3171 Document: 01019680226 Date Filed: 08/30/2016 Page: 3