Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03361/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03361-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Tydarryl Griffin
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3361

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff - Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Missouri.

*

TyDarryl Griffin, * [PUBLISHED]

*

Defendant - Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: April 12, 2005

Filed: August 15, 2005

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

A few days before the Supreme Court decided Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S.

296 (2004), TyDarryl Griffin pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a

firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). In the plea agreement, Griffin admitted

a prior felony drug conviction and waived “all rights to appeal all non-jurisdictional

issues including, but not limited to . . . whatever sentence is imposed,” except

departure issues. At sentencing, Griffin argued that Blakely rendered the Guidelines

unconstitutional and precluded the district court from considering his prior conviction

Appellate Case: 04-3361 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/15/2005 Entry ID: 1940308
1

The HONORABLE DONALD J. STOHR, United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri.

2

We note that Griffin’s sentencing argument also fails on the merits. Neither

Booker nor Shepard v. United States, 125 S. Ct. 1254 (2005), altered the rule that

both the fact and the nature of a prior conviction are issues for the sentencing court,

not the jury. United States v. Marcussen, 403 F.3d 982, 984 (8th Cir. 2005).

Moreover, Griffin admitted the prior felony drug conviction in his plea agreement;

the district court may rely on a defendant’s admissions in sentencing. Booker, 125

S. Ct. at 756.

-2-

because the government did not plead and prove it. The district court1

 overruled these

objections and sentenced Griffin to 64 months in prison and two years of supervised

release. Griffin appeals. Applying our appeal waiver decisions in light of the

subsequent controlling decision in United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), we

dismiss the appeal.

Griffin argues that we should ignore the appeal waiver in his plea agreement

because he entered into the agreement prior to the unexpected decision in Blakely.

However, “[t]he fact that [Griffin] did not anticipate the Blakely or Booker rulings

does not place the issue outside the scope of his waiver.” United States v. Killgo, 397

F.3d 628, 629 n.2 (8th Cir. 2005). The non-jurisdictional sentencing issue Griffin

seeks to raise on appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver. Griffin does not

challenge the appeal waiver as not knowing and voluntary or as a miscarriage of

justice. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 890-92 (8th Cir.) (en banc), cert.

denied, 540 U.S. 997 (2003). Therefore, we must enforce the appeal waiver and

dismiss the appeal.2

The appeal is dismissed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-3361 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/15/2005 Entry ID: 1940308