Court Opinion

ID: 9437805
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 04:50:04.160739+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:25:04.282243
License: Public Domain

BRISCOE, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result. I write separately, however, because the majority’s proposed clarification of the exception announced in United States v. Torres-Duenas, 461 F.3d 1178, 1182-83 (10th Cir.2006) (allowing reasonableness review of forfeited substantive sentencing challenges) is unnecessary and, thus, dicta. The long and the short of the matter is that Mancera-Perez, by seeking and agreeing to the sentence imposed by the district court, clearly waived the challenges he now seeks to assert to that sentence. See United States v. Carrasco-Salazar, 494 F.3d 1270, 1272-73 (10th Cir.2007) (discussing waiver and forfeiture in *1060the context of sentencing challenges). Necessarily, then, Mancera-Perez cannot benefit from any standards of review, or exceptions therefrom, that we apply in cases where an error has been properly preserved or merely forfeited.