UNITED STATES CO URT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. DAVID VILLAGRANA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 12-2122 (D.C. No. 1:11-CR-01877-MV-1) (D. N.M.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before BRISCOE , Chief Judge, MURPHY and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the court on the government’s motion to enforce the appeal waiver contained in defendant David Villagrana’s pl ea agreement. We grant the government’s motion a nd dismiss the appeal. Mr. Villagrana pled guilty to possession with intent to dist ribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841( a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). At his change-of-plea hearing, he

* This panel has determined that oral ar gument 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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctr ines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It ma y 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 11, 2012

Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court- 2 - confirmed to the district court that the plea agreement had been read to him in Spanish, he had discussed it with his attorney, his attorney had answered his questions about it, he had no more questions about it for th e court or for his attorney, he was satisfied with his attorney’s advi ce and representation, he had no complaints about his attorney, he was not threatened or coerced into pleading guilty, and he signed the plea agreement freely and voluntarily. See Aplee. Mot. to Enforce Appellate Waiver in Plea Agre ement, Att. 2, at 13, 26-27, 28-29. The court accepted his guilty plea and determined that his total offense level was 27, his criminal history category was I, and the applicable advi sory guideline range was 70-87 months in prison. But Mr. Villagrana wa s also safety-v alve eligible, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f); U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2, and the district court sentenced him to 60 months’ imprisonment, below the advisory guideline range. In his plea agreement, Mr . Villagrana waived his right to appeal his conviction

or his sentence if his sentence was with in or below the applicable advisory sentencing guideline range, as determ ined by the district court. See Aplee. Mot. to Enforce Appellate Waiver in Pl ea Agreement, Att. 1, at 8-9. Nevertheless, he filed a pro se notice of appeal in the district c ourt. The government filed a motion in this court to enforce the pl ea agreement pursuant to United States v. Hahn , 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam). Mr. Villagrana’s attorney stated that there are no non-frivolous arguments th at can be presented in response to the motion to- 3 - enforce, citing Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967) , and filed a motion to

withdraw as counsel. We will enforce an appeal waiver as long as three elem ents are met: (1) “the disputed appeal falls within the scope of the appellate waiver”; (2) “the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appell ate rights”; and (3) “enforcing the waiver will [not] result in a miscarriage of justice.” Hahn , 359 F.3d at 1325, 1327. Mr. Villagrana timely filed a pro se res ponse to the government’s motion, raising two arguments. First, he makes a conclusory argument that his appeal does not fall within the appeal waiver b ecause he was tricked into pl eading guilty by his attorney and coached as to how to respond to the c ourt during the change-of-plea hearing. He does not explain further, howev er, and we are not persuade d that his waiver of his appeal rights was not knowin g and voluntary. His ine ffective-assistance claims should be raised, if at all, in a collateral proceedi ng under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

See United States v. Novosel , 481 F.3d 1288, 1294-95 (10th Cir. 2007) (per curiam). His plea agreement preserves his right to bring a § 2255 motion asserting that his counsel was ineffective in negotiating or entering the plea agreement or appeal waiver. Aplee. Mot. to Enfo rce Appellate Waiver in Plea Ag reement, Att. 1, at 9. Second, Mr. Villagrana argues that the district court abused its discretion by not reducing his sentence further below th e guideline range on account of his certain deportation on account of his conviction. Bu t this argument is not only unsupported,- 4 - it also does not relate to the elements we must consider when determining whether to enforce the appeal waiver.

Under Anders , we have reviewed the motion a nd the record, and we conclude that Mr. Villagrana’s proposed appeal falls within the sc ope of the appeal waiver, that he knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights, and that enforcing the

waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. See Hahn , 359 F.3d at 1325-27. Accordingly, we GRANT the governme nt’s motion to enforce the appeal waiver, GRANT Mr. Villagran a’s attorney’s motion to withdraw, and DISMISS the appeal.

Entered for the Court Per Curiam