FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T J UNE 15, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 11 06 3 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock et No. 3 :0 9- cr-0 01 69 -MM H-JR K-3

UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A,
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee,

ve rs us
FELIPE LOPEZ-ATANA CIO, a.k .a. Sil va no Lop ez, a.k .a. Fel ip e Lop ez,
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t for th e Mi dd le Dis tri ct of F lo rid a

__

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (J un e 1 5, 2 01 1)
Befo re MAR CUS, MARTIN an d ANDERSON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

. PER CURI AM:Fel ip e Lop ez-At an a c i o ap pe al s fro m hi s co nv ic ti on pu rs ua nt to a pl ea

ag reem en t a n d h is 60 -m on th st at ut or y m an da to ry m in im um se nt en ce im

po se d fo r

co ns pi racy to d is tri bu te co cai ne in th e am ou nt of 5 00 gra m s or m or e in vi ol at io n of

21 U.S.C. §§ 84 1( a)(1 ), (b )(1 )(B) , an d 84 6. Lop ez-A t a n a c i o arg ue s th at : (1 ) th e

go ve rn m en t m at eri al ly br each ed th e cl au se of th e pl ea ag reem en t th at pe rm it te d hi m

to req u e s t sa fet y va lv e rel ie f pu rs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (f) wit ho ut go ve rn m en t

op po si ti on ; an d ( 2 ) he rece iv ed in effe ct iv e as si st an ce of co un se l in ne go ti at in g hi s pl ea ag reem en t, an d th is is su e fal ls ou ts id e th e sc op e of hi s ap pe al waiv er be cau se it
ch al le ng es th e va li di ty of th e gu il ty pl ea as a who le

. Afte r care fu l rev ie w, we affi rm

. W he th er th e go ve rn m en t br each ed a pl ea ag reem en t is a qu es ti on of la w, to be

rev ie wed de no vo

. Un i t e d S t a t es v. De La Garza , 51 6 F.3 d 12 66 , 12 69 (1 1t h Ci r.
20 08 ). Howev er, whe n a de fen da nt fai ls to rai se an is su e be fo re th e di st ric t co ur t, we

rev ie w fo r pl ai n erro r. Id

. Und er pl ai n erro r rev ie w, th e de fen da nt m us t sh ow (1 ) an

erro r, (2 ) th at is pl ai n, (3 ) th at affe ct s th e de fen da nt ’s su bs ta nt ia l rig ht s, an d (4) th at

se rio us ly affe ct s th e fai rn es s, in te gr it y , or pu bl ic rep ut at io n of jud ic ia l pr oc eed in gs

. Id

. Cl ai m s of in effe ct iv e as si st an ce of co un se l ge ne ral ly are no t co ns id ered fo r th e
fir st ti m e on di rect ap pe al

. Mas sa ro v. Uni te d St at es , 53 8 U.S. 50 0, 50 5- 06 (2 00 3)

. The go ve rn m en t is bo un d by an y m at eri al pr om is es it m ak es to a de fen da nt as

pa rt of a pl ea ag reem en t th at in du ces th e de fen da nt to pl ead gu il ty. Uni te d St at es v.

2Hor sf

al l, 55 2 F.3 d 12 75 , 12 81 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 08 ). W he th er th e go ve rn m en t vi ol at ed th e

ag reem en t is jud ge d acco rd in g to th e de fen da nt ’s reas on ab le un de r s t a n di ng at th e
ti m e he en te red hi s pl ea. Id

. Sp eci fic al ly, wit h res pe ct to an ag reem en t no t to op po se

sa fet y va lv e rel ie f, we ha ve he ld th at th e go ve rn m en t di d no t br each a pl ea ag reem en t by req ue st in g a se nt en ce at the h ig h- en d o f th e g ui de li ne ran ge , when it s o bl ig at io n

was co nt in ge nt on th e de fen da nt ’s sa fet y va lv e el ig ib il it y an d a di st ric t co ur t fin di ng
th at th e de fen da nt sa ti sf

ie d th e cri te ria of § 35 53 (f). Uni te d Stat es v. M ah iq ue , 15 0

F.3 d 1 33 0, 1 33 2 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 8)

. Here, th e sa fet y va lv e pr ov is io n in Lop ez-At an aci o’s pl ea ag reem en t in cl ud es

two un am bi gu ou s co nd it io ns on th e go ve rn m en t’s ob li ga ti on s: (1 ) Lop ez-At an aci o

m us t req ue st sa fet y va lv e rel ie f an d (2 ) th e di st ric t co ur t m us t fin d th at he sa ti sf

ie s th e
cri te ria fo r rel ie f. On th is reco rd , th e g o v e r n m en t di d no t br each th e sa fet y va lv e

pr ov is io n of th e pl ea ag reem en t, be ca use L ope z- A ta

na ci o ne ve r inv ok ed th e pr ov is io n by req ue st in g sa fet y va lv e rel ie f. Add it io na ll y , Lop ez-At an aci o co nc ed ed he was no t
el ig ib le fo r sa fet y va l v e r e li ef, so th e di st ric t co ur t co ul d no t ha ve fo un d th at he

sa ti sf ie d th e cri te ria of § 35 53 (f) as req ui red to tri gg er th e go ve rn m en t’s ob li ga ti on s

un de r th e p ro vi si on . Mah iq ue , 15 0 F .3d at 1 33 2.

Fu rth erm or e, Lop ez-At an aci o’s arg um en t th at th e pl ea ag reem en t is vo id an d,
th eref or e, warra nt s wit hd rawal of hi s pl ea, fai ls be cau se th e go ve rn m en t di d no t m ak e

3an affi rm at iv e pr om is e th at he wou ld be el ig ib le fo r sa fet y va lv e rel ie f. In st ead , th e

pa rti es an ti ci pa te d th at th e di st ric t co ur t m ay fin d th at Lop ez- A t a n a c io was no t
el ig ib le fo r sa fet y va lv e rel ie f by co nd it io ni ng th e g o ve rn m en t’s ob li ga ti on s on a
fav or ab le fin di ng

. Thu s, Lop ez-At an aci o co ul d no t ha ve reas on ab ly un de rs to od th e

p r ov is io n to be a bi nd in g pr om is e th at he wou ld rece iv e th e be ne fit of sa fet y va lv e
rel ie f. The refo re, he fai ls to de m on st rat e t h a t t h e di st ric t co ur t erre d, pl ai nl y or

ot he rwis e, by acce pt in g hi s gu il ty pl ea an d se nt en ci ng hi m to th e m an da to ry m in im um
de sp it e th e sa fet y

va lv e p ro vi si on in hi s p le a ag reem en t.
As fo r Lo pe z-At an aci o’s in effe ct iv e as si st an ce of co un se l cl ai m s, th e reco rd
is al m os t en ti rel y de vo id of de ta il s reg ard in g th e ne go ti at io n of th e pl ea ag reem en t.
Thu s, Lope z-At an aci o’s in effe ct iv e as si st an ce of co un se l cl ai m s are be st su it ed to a

m ot io n to va cat e pu rs ua nt to 28 U.S.C. § 22 55 , whe re a di st ric t co ur t m ay de ve lo p th e

ne ces s a r y f

act s to de te rm in e th e ad eq ua cy of th e rep res en ta ti on

. See Mas sa ro , 5 38

U.S. at 50 5- 06

. Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm Lop ez-At an aci o’s co nv ic ti on an d se nt en ce,
wit ho ut rul in g o n h is in effe ct iv e as si st an ce o f co un se l cl ai m

. AFFIRMED.

4