Court Opinion

ID: 9374745
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-23 20:00:44.017433+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:52.670264
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-12166    Document: 20-1     Date Filed: 02/23/2023   Page: 1 of 3

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 22-12166
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiff-Appellee,
       versus
       JASPER BLACKSHEAR,
       a.k.a. BO LOCK,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Middle District of Georgia
                 D.C. Docket No. 5:21-cr-00038-MTT-CHW-1
USCA11 Case: 22-12166     Document: 20-1      Date Filed: 02/23/2023    Page: 2 of 3

       2                      Opinion of the Court                22-12166

                            ____________________

       Before ROSENBAUM, JILL PRYOR, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Jason Blackshear appeals his 130-month sentence for con-
       spiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of
       21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C). In response, the govern-
       ment has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the ap-
       peal waiver in Blackshear’s plea agreement.
             We review the validity of a sentence appeal waiver de novo.
       United States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 1064, 1066 (11th Cir. 2008).
              We grant the government’s motion to dismiss the appeal
       pursuant to the appeal waiver in Blackshear’s plea agreement.
       Blackshear’s appeal waiver is enforceable, as the record shows that
       he knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal. See
       United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350–51 (11th Cir. 1993)
       (explaining that sentence appeal waiver will be enforced if it was
       made knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Bascomb, 451
       F.3d 1292, 1297 (11th Cir. 2006) (stating that an appeal waiver “can-
       not be vitiated or altered by comments the court makes during sen-
       tencing”); United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d 1294, 1296
       (11th Cir. 2005) (explaining that a waiver of the right to appeal in-
       cludes waiver of the right to appeal difficult or debatable legal is-
       sues or even blatant error). Indeed, the district court specifically
       questioned Blackshear about the appeal waiver during the plea col-
       loquy, and Blackshear confirmed at the plea colloquy that he read
USCA11 Case: 22-12166     Document: 20-1     Date Filed: 02/23/2023    Page: 3 of 3

       22-12166               Opinion of the Court                       3

       and understood the terms of the plea agreement and had no ques-
       tions about the plea agreement. See Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351 (ex-
       plaining that, to enforce a sentence appeal waiver, the “govern-
       ment must show that either (1) the district court specifically ques-
       tioned the defendant concerning the sentence appeal waiver during
       the Rule 11 colloquy, or (2) it is manifestly clear from the record
       that the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the
       waiver”); see also United States v. Medlock, 12 F.3d 185, 187 (11th
       Cir. 1994) (“There is a strong presumption that the statements
       made during the [plea] colloquy are true.”). Further, Blackshear
       does not argue that any of the exceptions specified in his appeal
       waiver apply.
               Accordingly, we GRANT the government’s motion to dis-
       miss.
               .