2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-30-2008 

# U SA v . K ohlmi lle r P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-4056

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . Ko hlmi lle r " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 31. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/31NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

N o. 07- 4056

UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. M I CHAEL KOHLM I LL ER, A ppel l ant

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D. C. No. 0 6 - c r - 0 0 0 5 1 - 1 E) D istri ct Ju d g e: H o n o rab le M au ri ce B C o h il l, Jr.

Subm i t t ed underT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

on D ece m ber11, 2008 B efor e: M cK E E , SM I T H and R O T H , C i r cui tJ udge ( O pi ni on fi l ed: D ece m ber30, 2008)

O P I N I O N2

RO T H, C i r cui tJ udge: M i chae l K ohl m i l l erappea l s t he s ent ence i m pos ed byt he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ct C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia. F o r th e re a so n s d isc u ss e d b e lo w , w e w ill a f f i r m. I . B ackground an d P roce dural H i s t ory B e c a u se th e f

a c ts a re w e ll k n o w n to th e p a rties , w e w ill d isc u ss th e m o n lyb rie f ly h e re . O n S e p tem b e r 1 2 , 2 0 0 6 , a g ra n d ju ryin th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia r etur ned a f

i fty - s even- counti ndi ctm entchar gi ng M i chae l K ohl m i l l erw i t h for t y - fi ve c o u n ts o f b a n k f ra u d in v io latio n o f

1 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 4 4 , ele v e n c o u n ts o f w ire f ra u d in vi ol at i on of 18 U . S. C . § 1343, and one c ountof aggr avat ed i dent i t yt hefti n vi ol at i on of 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 0 2 8 (A ). O n M a rc h 2 8 , 2 0 0 7 , p u rsu a n t to th e p a rties ’ p lea a g re e m e n t, K ohl m i l l erpl eade d gui l t yt o C ountO ne and CountFi fty - Seven; he ac know l edged r es pons i bi l i t yfort he conduc tchar ged i n t he i nt erveni ng count s . O n O ct ober9, 2007, t he D i s t r i ctC our ts ent ence d K ohl m i l l ert o s eventy - fi ve mont hs ’ i m pr i s onm ent . T he D i s t r i ct C our tal s o i m pos ed fi ve- y ear s ’ s upervi s ed r el eas e and or der ed K ohl m i l l ert o pay re s titu tio n . I n t he part i es ’ pl ea a gr eement , K ohl m i l l eragr eed t o w ai ve hi s r i ghtt o “t ake a d ir e c t a p p e a l f

ro m h is c o n v ic tio n o r s e n te n c e u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 o r 1 8 U .S .C . § 3742" s ubj ectt o t hr ee e xcept i ons . T hos e thr ee e xcept i ons ar e as fol l ow s : ( 1) t he3

g o v e rn m e n t ap p e a led h is s e n ten c e , (2 ) th e se n ten c e e x c e e d e d th e sta tu to rylim its se t f o rth i n t he U ni t ed St at es C ode, or( 3) t he s ent ence unr eas onabl yexce eded the G ui del i nes r ange a s det erm i ned byt he D i s t r i ctC our t . K ohl m i l l erar gues t hatt he w ai veragr eement does notbart hi s C our tfr om addr es s i ng hi s ar gum entt hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tappl i ed im p ro p e r e n h a n c e m e n ts d u ri n g s e n te n c in g . II . A n a ly sis T he D i s t r i ctC our thad j ur i s di ct i on under18 U . S. C . § 3231. W e have j ur i s di ct i on u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . “W her e, as her e, t he governm enti nvokes an appe l l at e- w ai verpr ovi s i on cont ai ned i n a def endant ’ s pl ea a gr eement , w e mustdet erm i ne as a thr es hol d m at t erw hethert he appel l at e w ai verpr event s us fr om exer ci s i ng ourj ur i s di ct i on t o r evi ew t he mer i t s of the defe ndant ’ s appea l . ” U nited S tates v. C orso , -- - F .3 d -- - ( 3 d C ir . D e c e m b e r 1 5 , 2 0 0 8 ). W e w i l l notexer ci s e ourj ur i s di ct i on i f w e conc l ude thatt he def endantknow i ngl yand vol unt ar i l yw ai ved hi s r i ghtt o appea l unl es s t he r es ul tw oul d “w or k a mi s carr i age of ju s tic e .” See U

ni t ed Stat es v. G oods on , 5 4 4 F .3 d 5 2 9 , 5 3 6 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 8 ); U ni t ed Stat es v . G w in n e tt , 4 8 3 F . 3 d 2 0 0 , 2 0 3 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 7 ). K ohl m i l l erfi r s tar gues t hathe di d notknow i ngl yand vol unt ar i l yent eri nt o t he w aive r ag ree m en t bec au se n eith er the g o v ern m en t no r th e D istri ct C o u rtrea d the e n ti re w ai verpar agr aph dur i ng t he gui l t y - pl ea c ol l oquy . T o eval uat e w hetherK ohl m i l l er know i ngl yand vol unt ar i l ys i gned the w ai ver , w e fi r s tl ook t o t he l anguage of the4

a g re e m e n t. G w in n e tt , 4 8 3 F .3 d a t 2 0 3

– 0 4 ; s ee G oods on , 544 F. 3d at535. T he l anguage of the pl ea a gr eementconvey s a cl eari nt entt o bi nd K ohl m i l l erbeca us e i ts t at es t hat “M i chae l K ohl m i l l erw ai ves t he r i ghtt o t ake a di r ectappea l fr om hi s convi ct i on or s ent ence under28 U . S. C . § 1291 or18 U . S. C . § 3742. ” W e nextl ook t o t he col l oquy betw een the D i s t r i ctC our tand K ohl m i l l ert o det erm i ne w hethert he D i s t r i ctC our tpl ace d K o h lm ille r u n d e r o a th a n d d e te rm in e d th a t h e u n d e rs to o d th e te rm s o f th e w a iv e r. See G w in n e tt , 483 F. 3d at204. T he D i s t r i ctC our ts at i s fi ed thi s r equi r ementbeca us e i tas ked K ohl m i l l erw hetherhe r ead the pl ea a gr eement , di s cus s ed i tw i t h hi s at t or ney , and under s t ood i t . T he D i s t r i ctC our t , fur t herm or e, s peci fi cal l yas ked K ohl m i l l erw hetherhe under s t ood t hatt he pl ea a gr eement“s i gni fi cant l yci r cumscr i bed” hi s “appe l l at e r i ght s . ” K o h lm ill e r re sp o n d e d , “Y e s, sir,” a n d a sk e d n o q u e stio n s. K o h lm ill e r th u s k n o w in g ly a n d v o lu n ta ri ly en te re d in to th e w a iv e r a g re e m e n t. K ohl m i l l eral s o ar gues t hatt hi s appea l fal l s w i t hi n t he thi r d exce pt i on t o t he w a iv e r a g re e m e n t. U n d e r th e th ird e x c e p tio n , K o h lm ill e r re tain e d th e rig h t to a p p e a l to t he ext entt hathi s “s ent ence unr eas onabl yexce eds t he gui del i nes r ange de t erm i ned byt he C our t . ” K ohl m i l l er ’ s chal l enge f ai l s beca us e he doe s notar gue thathi s s ent ence “exc eede d” the r ange de t erm i ned byt he D i s tr i ctC our t . I ndeed, he conc edes t hatt he s ent ence fel l w i t hi n t he r ange. H e, i ns t ead, at t acks t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s i m pos i t i on of e n h a n c e m e n ts , w h ic h re s u lte d f ro m th e c a lc u la tio n o f

th e G u id e lin e s . See U

ni t ed Stat es v. Shedr i ck , 493 F. 3d 292, 298 n. 5 ( 3d C i r . 2007) . A s w e not ed i n Shedr i ck , K ohl m i l l er5

w ai ved hi s r i ghtt o appea l an enha ncementundert he w ai veragr eement ; he r et ai ned the ri g h t to a p p e a l o n ly if

th e D is tr ic t C o u rt u p w a rd ly d e p a rt e d f ro m th e G u id e lin e s . I

d. Fi nal l y , K ohl m i l l erar gues t hatt hi s C our ts houl d heart hi s appea l beca us e the enfor cementof the w ai verw oul d w or k a mi s carr i age of j us t i ce be caus e i tw as t he pr oduct of i neff ect i ve as s i s t ance of couns el . K ohl m i l l erar gues t hatcouns el w as i neff ect i ve beca us e couns el s houl d have a dvi s ed hi m t hatt he pl ea a gr eementw as nots uppor t ed by cons i der at i on. Pl ea a gr eement s ar e cons t rued ac cor di ng t o gener al contr act - l aw p ri n c ip le s . See C orso , --- F . 3 d at --- ; U n itedS ta tes v . Sc h w a rtz , 511 F. 3d 403, 405 ( 3d C ir . 2 0 0 8 ). I t is a x io m a tic th a t c o n tr a c ts m u s t b e s u p p o rt e d b yc o n s id e ra tio n . See, e. g. , B l ai rv. Scot tSpeci al t

y G as es , 283 F. 3d 595, 603 ( 3d C i r . 2002) ( i nt ernal ci t at i ons om i t t ed) . W e appl ya fa ct - s peci fi c appr oach t o det erm i ne w hethera mi s carr i age of j us t i ce w ill r e s u lt f

ro m e n f o rc e m e n t o f

a w a iv e r o f

a p p e lla te ri g h ts . U

ni t ed Stat es v. Khat tak , 2 7 3 F .3 d 5 5 7 , 5 6 4 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). W e c o n s id e r, in tera lia , the c lar ityo f th e e rro r, it s g ra v ity, a n d its c h a ra c te r. Id . K ohl m i l l erfai l s her e bec aus e he doe s noti dent i fyanyerr or bycou nsel becau se consi derat i on did, i n fac t , supp ortt he p l ea agreem ent— t hat i s, K o h lm ill e r o b tain e d d ism iss a l o f f if ty -f iv e c o u n ts b e c a u se th e g o v e rn m e n t m o v e d to dis m i ss them and t he g ov ernm ent, i n return, ob t ai ned t w o g uil t ypleas .6

I I I . C oncl usi on Fort he r eas ons s etfor t h above, w e w i l l aff i r m t he j udgm entof s ent ence of the D is tr ic t C o u rt .