[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-12658

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TERRILL TREMAYNE TAYLOR, 

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Alabama

D.C. Docket No. 2:20-cr-00222-ECM-JTA-1

____________________

USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 1 of 4
2 Opinion of the Court 22-12658

Before NEWSOM, BRANCH, and GRANT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Terrill Taylor pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea 

agreement containing a sentence-appeal waiver, to being a felon in 

possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). The 

district court sentenced Taylor to 57 months’ imprisonment, 

followed by 3 years’ supervised release. Taylor appeals, arguing 

that the district court erred in imposing a two-level guidelines 

enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A).1 The government 

moves to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the sentence-appeal 

waiver.2 After review, we conclude that the sentence-appeal 

waiver is valid and enforceable. Therefore, we grant the 

government’s motion to dismiss. 

“We review the validity of a sentence appeal waiver de 

novo.” United States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 1064, 1066 (11th Cir. 

2008). We enforce appeal waivers that are made knowingly and 

voluntarily. See United States v. Bascomb, 451 F.3d 1292, 1294 

(11th Cir. 2006); United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350–51 

(11th Cir. 1993). To demonstrate that a waiver was made 

knowingly and voluntarily, the government must show that either 

1 Under this guideline, the district court is instructed to add two levels if the 

offense involved 3 to 7 firearms. See U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A). 

2 Taylor did not file a response to the government’s motion to dismiss. 

USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 2 of 4
22-12658 Opinion of the Court 3

(1) the district court specifically questioned the defendant about the 

waiver during the plea colloquy; or (2) the record makes clear that 

the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the 

waiver. Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351.

Taylor’s plea agreement contained the following appeal 

waiver:

Understanding that 18 U.S.C. § 3742 provides for 

appeal by a defendant of the sentence under certain 

circumstances, the defendant expressly waives any 

and all rights conferred by 18 U.S.C. § 3742 to appeal 

the conviction or sentence. The defendant further 

expressly waives the right to attack the conviction 

or sentence in any post-conviction proceeding, 

including proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. 

Exempt from this waiver is the right to appeal or 

collaterally attack the conviction or sentence on the 

grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel or 

prosecutorial misconduct.

Taylor signed the plea agreement. 

The record establishes that the magistrate judge3 questioned 

Taylor about the sentence-appeal waiver during the change-of-plea 

hearing. Specifically, the magistrate judge confirmed that Taylor

read the plea agreement in its entirety, understood it, and signed it. 

The magistrate judge explained to Taylor that, by pleading guilty, 

3 Taylor consented to the magistrate judge taking his plea. 

USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 3 of 4
4 Opinion of the Court 22-12658

he was giving up his right to appeal his sentence, and Taylor 

confirmed that he understood. Taylor further confirmed that there 

were no provisions in the plea agreement that he did not 

understand and that he wished to enter the plea agreement. He 

also confirmed that no one had made any promises or threats to 

him to induce him to enter the plea, and that he was pleading guilty 

voluntarily. 

Accordingly, the record establishes that Taylor’s sentenceappeal waiver was knowingly and voluntarily made and is 

enforceable. Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351; see also United States v. 

Weaver, 275 F.3d 1320, 1333 (11th Cir. 2001) (enforcing an appeal 

waiver where “the waiver provision was referenced during [the 

defendant’s] Rule 11 plea colloquy and [the defendant] agreed that 

she understood the provision and that she entered into it freely and 

voluntarily”). 

Because Taylor’s claim concerning the guidelines 

enhancement does not fall within any of the limited exceptions to 

the valid sentence-appeal waiver, the waiver forecloses his appeal. 

Accordingly, we GRANT the government’s motion to dismiss.

APPEAL DISMISSED. 

USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 4 of 4