Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-07-04175/USCOURTS-ca10-07-04175-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Stephen J. Eldredge
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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the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

December 5, 2007

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff!Appellee,

v.

STEPHEN J. ELDREDGE,

Defendant!Appellant.

No. 07-4175,

(D.C. No. 2:05-CR-771-TC)

(D. Utah)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before KELLY, EBEL, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.

Stephen J. Eldredge pleaded guilty to manufacturing counterfeit obligations

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 471. Under the terms of the plea agreement, he

waived his right to appeal or collaterally attack any issue concerning his

prosecution, conviction, and sentence except any sentence imposed above the

statutory maximum or any upward departure imposed above the high end of the

guideline range. See Mot. to Enforce, Attach. A (Plea Agreement) at 3, para. 10. 

Appellate Case: 07-4175 Document: 010180453 Date Filed: 12/05/2007 Page: 1
-2-

The statutory maximum sentence was twenty years in prison, but the district court

sentenced Mr. Eldredge to twelve months and did not apply an upward departure. 

Nevertheless, Mr. Eldredge filed a notice of appeal, and the government moved to

enforce his appeal waiver in accord with the procedure established in United

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

Mr. Eldredge’s attorney has since filed a response to the government’s

motion to enforce, stating his belief that there is no legitimate basis for the

appeal. We therefore afforded Mr. Eldredge the opportunity to file a pro se

response to the government’s motion, but he did not respond. Hence, we proceed

under Hahn to consider (1) whether the disputed issue falls within the scope of

the waiver of appellate rights; (2) whether the defendant knowingly and

voluntarily waived his appellate rights; and (3) whether enforcing the waiver

would result in a miscarriage of justice. Id. We have reviewed the parties’

materials and conclude that the Hahn factors weigh in favor of the government. 

Accordingly, we GRANT the government’s motion to enforce the plea agreement

and DISMISS the appeal. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

PER CURIAM

Appellate Case: 07-4175 Document: 010180453 Date Filed: 12/05/2007 Page: 2