Opinion ID: 612943
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Plea Agreement Waiver

Text: Defendants argue that even if Heck does not bar Lockett's law suit, the case is barred because, in his plea agreement, Lockett waived his right to appeal any California Penal Code section 1538.5 suppression issues. The superior court clerk's minutes reflect Lockett's appellate waiver in two places. One handwritten note reads: Def waives his right to appeal any 1538.5 issues. Another handwritten note reads: Def waives any appeal rights in regards to 1538.5 issues. [P]lea agreements are contractual in nature, and, as is typical in contract cases, if the terms are clear and unambiguous, we will not look further. United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1092, 1094 (9th Cir.2010) (footnote omitted). The terms of Lockett's plea agreement appear clear and unambiguous: he waive[d] any appeal rights in regards to 1538.5 issues. (emphasis added). The term appeal rights in a criminal plea agreement does not encompass civil litigation rights. Moreover, we steadfastly apply the rule that any lack of clarity in a plea agreement should be construed against the government as drafter. United States v. Cope, 527 F.3d 944, 951 (9th Cir.2008) (internal quotation marks omitted). Thus, even if the terms of Lockett's appellate waiver were ambiguous, we would construe that ambiguity against the government and conclude that the waiver in the plea agreement does not affect Lockett's ability to pursue this separate civil law suit.