Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-10-07018/USCOURTS-ca10-10-07018-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Danuel Junior Dyer
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

* 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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the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.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

July 27, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

DANUEL JUNIOR DYER,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-7018

(D.C. No. 6:08-CR-00025-FHS-5)

(E.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before MURPHY, TYMKOVICH, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

Danuel Junior Dyer entered a guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to

possess with intent to distribute and distribution of controlled substances in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. His plea agreement included a waiver of his right to

appeal his conviction or sentence. Despite his appeal waiver, Mr. Dyer filed an

appeal seeking to challenge his conviction and sentence. The government then

Appellate Case: 10-7018 Document: 01018464777 Date Filed: 07/27/2010 Page: 1 
-2-

moved to enforce the appeal waiver pursuant to our decision in United States v.

Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam). 

Mr. Dyer has now filed a response to the government’s motion to enforce

the plea agreement, in which he concedes through counsel that “as a part of the

plea agreement he entered into in this case, [he] executed a broad waiver of his

appellate and post-conviction rights.” Resp. at 1. He notes, however, that he

reserved his right to bring a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion alleging ineffective

assistance of counsel in the matter of his guilty plea and plea agreement. 

Mr. Dyer concludes his response by asking this court to dismiss his appeal

without prejudice to his right to file a § 2255 motion. 

Because Mr. Dyer has not challenged the government’s motion to enforce,

and he has asked this court to dismiss his appeal, we GRANT the motion to

enforce the appeal waiver, without prejudice to Mr. Dyer’s right to file a § 2255

motion asserting ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with his guilty

plea and waiver, and we DISMISS the appeal. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

PER CURIAM

Appellate Case: 10-7018 Document: 01018464777 Date Filed: 07/27/2010 Page: 2