# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 8- 20 19

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Mo nt ay Mau ric e Kni gh t

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__

__ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of No rth Dako ta - Bi sm arck

__

__ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: May 15, 2 01 9
Fi le d: Octo be r 1, 2 01 9 [Pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re BENTON, W OLLMAN, and GRASZ, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Mo nt ay M. Kni gh t pl ed gu il ty to tra ns po rta ti on f o r i ll eg al se xu al act iv it y , in

v i o l at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 24 21 (a) an d (2 ), an d co ns pi racy to di st rib ut e an d po ss e s s
wit h in te nt to di st rib ut e co nt ro ll ed su bs ta nc es , in vi ol at io n of 21 U.S.C. §§ 84 1( a)(1 ),84 1( b) (1 )(C)

, an d 84 6. The di st ric t co ur t se nt en ced hi m to 79 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t 1

on each co un t to ru n co n c u r r e nt ly. As a co nd it io n of rel eas e, it req ui red hi m to

co m pl y wit h th e Sex Offen de r Registrat io n an d Not ifi cat io n Act (“ SORNA”). Kni gh t

ap pe al s th e SORNA reg is tra ti on req ui rem en ts

. Hav in g juri sd ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C.
§ 1 29 1, t hi s co ur t af

fir m s.

K n ig ht as se rts th e di st ric t co ur t erre d by req ui rin g hi m to co m p l y w i t h

S O R NA’ s se x- of

fen de r-re gi st rat io n req ui rem en ts as pa rt of hi s su pe rv is ed rel e a s e

. The go ve rn m en t co nt en ds Kni gh t waiv ed h i s r ig ht to ap pe al th is is su e in th e pl ea

ag reem en t. Thi s co ur t rev i e w s a w a i v er of ap pe ll at e rig ht s, “ co nf irm[ing ] th at th e

ap pe al fal ls wit h i n th e sc op e of th e waiv er an d th at bo th th e waiv er an d pl ea

ag reem en t were en te red in to kn owi ng ly an d vo lu nt ari ly.” Uni te d St at es v. And is

, 33 3

F.3 d 88 6, 88 9- 90 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ) (en ba nc )

. “ Eve n whe n th es e co nd it io ns are m et

, ho wev er,” th i s c o u r t “ wil l no t en fo rce a waiv er whe re to do so wou ld res ul t in a

m is carr ia ge of ju st ic e.” Id

. at 89 0.

The pl ea ag reem en t’s “ W ai ve r of App eal ” sa y s:

Defen da nt an d de fen da nt ’s at to rn ey ack n o w le dg e th ey ha ve fu ll y

r e v i e w e d a n d fu ll y di sc us se d th e reco rd in th is cas e an d al l is su es th at

m ay be rai se d on ap pe al

. The y ha ve fu ll y di sc us se d de fen da nt ’s rig ht of

ap pe al an d th e co ns eq ue nc es of waiv er. Defen da nt ha s de ci de d to waiv e

an y rig ht of a pp eal , exc ep t as m ay be pro vi de d h erei n.

By si gn in g th is Pl ea Agr eem en t, de fen da nt vo lu nt ar i ly waiv es de fen da nt ’s rig ht to ap pe al th e Co ur t’s Ju dg m en t ag ai ns t de fen da nt ; an d,
ab se nt a cl ai m of in effe ct iv e as si st an ce of co un se l, de fen da nt waiv es al l rig ht s t o co nt es t th e Ju dg m en t in an y po st -co nv ic ti on pr oc eed in g, in cl ud in g on e pu rs ua nt to Tit le 28

, Uni te d St at es Co de

, Sect io n 22 55

.

The Hon or ab le Dan ie l L. Hov la nd

, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t 1

fo r th e Dis tri ct of No rth Dako ta

.

-2

-D e f

e n da nt res erv es the ri gh t to ap pea l fro m a se nten ce tha t is

gr ea ter th an th e bi ndi ng pl ea ag reement of 79 m on ths in ca rcer at io n.

. . . .

Defen da nt un de rs ta nd s an d ag rees th is cas e wil l be ov er on ce de fen da nt ha s be en se nt en ced by th e Co ur t. Defen da nt ag rees th a t it wil l be a br each of th is ag reem en t if de fen da nt ap pe al s in vi ol at io n of t hi s
ag reem en t.

(em ph as is i n or ig in al ). The pl ea ag reem en t al so in fo rm ed Kni gh t th at he wou ld be

req ui red to reg is te r as a se x o ffen de r:

T hr ou gh ex ecu ti on of th is Pl ea Agr eem en t, de fe nda nt ac know le dge s tha t he ha s be en ad vi se d, an d un de rs ta nd s, th at pu rs ua nt to th e Sex Offen de r Reg is t r a t i o n an d Not ifi cat io n Act, a fed eral la w, he m us t reg is te r as a

se xu al of fen de r an d ke ep reg is tra ti on cu rren t in each of th e fo ll owi ng juri sd ic ti on s: whe re he res id es , whe re he is em pl oyed, an d whe re he is

a st ud en t. Defen da nt un de rs ta nd s th at th e req ui rem en ts fo r reg is tra ti on in cl ud e pr ov id in g hi s na m e, hi s r e s i d e n c e ad dr es s, an d th e na m es an d
ad dr es se s of an y pl aces whe re he is or wil l be an em pl oyee or st ud en t,

am on g o th er i nf

or m at io n.

Kni gh t’s ap pe al fal ls wit hi n t he sco pe of t he waiv er.

The waiv er al so was kn owi ng an d vo lu nt ary. A di st ric t co ur t en su res an ap pe al

waiv er is kn owi ng an d vo lu nt ary by “ pr op erl y qu es ti on [in g] a de fen da nt ab ou t hi s or
he r de ci si on to en te r th at ag reem en t an d waiv e th e rig ht to ap pe al .” And is

, 33 3 F.3d

at 89 1. The di st ric t co ur t qu es ti on ed Kni gh t at le ng th ab ou t hi s de ci si on to waiv e hi s rig ht to ap pe al :

THE COURT: Is i t f

a i r f o r m e to as su m e th at y ou ha ve m ad e a

co ns ci ou s, vo lu nt ary de ci si on to pl ead gu i l t y a n d si gn th e Pl ea Agr eem en t?

-3

-THE DE FENDANT: Yes.

. . . .

THE COURT: All rig ht

. The n if y ou co ul d tu rn to pa rag rap h 20 fo un d

on pa ge 9, it ’s en ti tl ed “ Defen da nt ’s W ai ve r of App eal ” an d th os e wor ds

are bo ld ed

. And waiv er of ap pe al m ean s gi vi ng up y ou r rig ht of ap pe al

. Thi s is an im

po rta nt pa rag rap h, an d it ’s a pa rag rap h t h at ’s fo un d in
al m os t ev ery pl ea ag reem en t si gn ed by de f e n d a n t s an y whe re in th is

co un try in a fed eral cri m in al cas e.

The pa rag rap h co nt ai ns a lo t of fan cy la wy er la ng ua ge , bu t he re’s wha t it m ean s. An d i f y ou tu rn to th e to p of pag e 10

, th e ve ry to p, s ee t ho se bo ld ed word s?

THE DE FENDANT: Yes, Yo ur Hon or

.

THE COURT: W ha t th is pa rag rap h sa y s w h e n you cu t th ro ug h al l th e l e g a le se is th at be fo re I se nt en ce y ou , I ne ed to de te rm in e wha t t h e

s e n t e n c in g gu id el in e ran ge is

. W e as su m e th at it ’s 70 to 87 m on t h s

. And th is pa rag rap h sa y s th at if I se nt en ce y ou to th e 79 m on t h s o f
in carc erat io n, th at y ou ’ve ag reed th at y ou wil l no t ap pe al or ch al le ng e
t h a t i n an y way

. You ’ve ag reed th at y ou wil l no t ap pe al or ch al le ng e th es e co nv ic ti on s o n you r rec or d, an d you wil l n ot ap pe al th e se nt en ce th at I or de r y ou to ser ve of 7 9 m on th s. Do y ou un de rs ta nd ?

THE DE FENDANT: Yes, Yo ur Hon or

.

THE COURT: Thi s pa rag rap h at th e to p of pa ge 10 do es sa y th at if I

se nt en ced y ou to m or e th an 79 m on th s, y ou wou ld ha ve a rig ht to ap pe al
th at

, bu t I’m go in g to acce pt th e te rm s of th e Pl ea Agr eem en t th at th e
pa rti es ha ve ne go ti at ed in th is cas e, an d th at m ean s th at I wil l be

se nt en ci ng y ou to 79 m on th s. A n d y ou ha ve ag reed th at y ou ’re go in g
to acce pt th at an d y ou ’re no t go in g to be on e of th os e pe op le th at tu rn

aro un d a n d s t a r t fil in g ap pe al s on ce y ou go to pr is on

. Do y ou

un de rs ta nd ?

-4

-THE DE FENDANT: Yes, Yo ur Hon or

.

TH E COURT: Ofte nt im es de fen da nt s, aft er th ey ’ve be en se nt en ced i n fed eral co ur t, wil l go to pr is on , an d th en th ey be co m e le ga l ex pe rts an d
th ey st art ru bb in g sh ou ld ers wit h a lo t of ot he r le ga l ex pe rts

, so th en th ey st art th in ki ng th ey

ou gh t t o fi le so m e m ot io ns to try to wea se l o ut of th ei r Pl ea Agr eeme n t s be cau se so m eb od y in ev it ab ly wil l te ll th em th ey go t a b ad de al

.

So th ey st art fil in g m ot io ns , an d th ey try to wit hd raw th ei r pl ea, an d th ey try to m ak e arg um en ts th at th ey di dn ’t u n d ers ta nd wha t th ey were
ge tt in g th em se lv es in to

, an d th ey weren ’t pr op erl y rep res en te d by th ei r
at to r n e y , an d th e jud ge ne ve r ex pl ai ne d an y th in g to th em , an d th e
arg um en ts go on an d o n a nd on

.

Bu t in th e fed eral syste m , pl ea ag reem en ts are co ns id ered to be

co nt ract s, an d y ou are go in g to be he ld to th is Pl ea Agr eem en t jus t li ke

an y ot he r co nt ract th at y ou m ig ht si gn in li fe. And th os e de fen da nt s th at si gn pl ea ag reem en ts li ke th i s an d tu rn aro un d an d ap pe al , t he y rare ly,
if ev er, are su cces sf

ul . Usu al ly the ap pe al s g et di sm is se d i n a bo ut on e

or two pa ge s.

I’ve b een he re 1 6 y ears

. Nev er ha d a de fen da nt th at ’s b een su cces sf ul
th at ’s ch al le ng e d on e of m y se nt en ces whe n I’ve se nt en ced th em in

acco rd an ce wit h a Pl ea Agr eem en t li ke th is

, so ge ne ral ly pe op le th at try

to ap pe al

, th e Co ur t of App eal s jus t sa y s t o t h e de fen da nt

, “ Mr.
Defen da nt

, y ou si gn ed a Pl ea Agr eem en t. You pr om is ed th at y ou wou ld

no t ap pe al . We’ re go in g t o h ol d you to th at . Cas e d is m is se d.” That ’s

es se nt ia ll y wha t th e de ci si on sa y s, so it ’s an im po rta nt pa rag rap h, bu t do

y ou feel y ou un de rs ta nd what it m ean s fo r y ou ?

THE DE FENDANT: Yes, Yo ur Hon or

.

The pl ea ag reem en t waiv es th e is su e pr es en te d, an d th ere is no m is carr ia ge of
jus ti ce in en fo rci ng it

. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Blu e Co at

, 34 0 F.3 d 53 9, 54 1- 42 (8 th Ci r.

-5

-20 03 ) (d is m is si ng ap pe al whe re se x- of fen de r-re gi st rat io n co nd it io n was co ve red by

ap pe al waiv er an d t he waiv er was en te red kn owi ng ly and vo lu nt ari ly).

* * * * * * *

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-6

-