Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oliver M. DOTTS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-10-04
Citations: 149 F. App'x 523
Docket Number: No. 05-1704
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oliver M. DOTTS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before COFFEY, ROVNER, and WOOD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 149
Pages: 523–524

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oliver M. DOTTS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-1704.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 22, 2005.
Decided Oct. 4, 2005.
Angela Scott, Office of the United States Attorney Criminal Fairview Heights, IL, for Division, Plaintiff-Appellee.
Alok Kale, Humphrey, Seigler & Kale, St. Louis, MO, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before COFFEY, ROVNER, and WOOD, Circuit Judges.
Dotts’s motion to waive oral argument is granted. Consequently, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(f).

Opinion:
ORDER
Oliver Dotts pleaded guilty to one count of assaulting a federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a). As part of the plea agreement, he waived the right to appeal his sentence, and there is no applicable exception to the waiver's enforceability. After the Supreme Court decided United States v. Booker, — U.S. —, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), the district court sentenced Dotts to 48 months' imprisonment, exceeding the upper limit of the guidelines' recommended sentence of 15 to 21 months yet nevertheless below the statutory maximum of eight years. Wright now argues that his sentence was unreasonably severe, but his appeal waiver did not contain an "escape hatch" enabling him to challenge his sentence based on our application of Booker. See United States v. Bournes, 405 F.3d 634, 636-37 (7th Cir. 2005); United States v. Roche, 415 F.3d 614, 617 (7th Cir.2005); United States v. Cieslowski, 410 F.3d 353, 362 (7th Cir. 2005); United States v. Lockwood, 416 F.3d 604, 608 (7th Cir.2005). This appeal is Dismissed.