Court Opinion

ID: 9901141
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-21 15:00:36.05136+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:28.070742
License: Public Domain

Appellate Case: 23-6072     Document: 010110956365       Date Filed: 11/21/2023    Page: 1
                                                                                   FILED
                                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                          Tenth Circuit

                              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT                        November 21, 2023
                          _________________________________
                                                                          Christopher M. Wolpert
                                                                              Clerk of Court
  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

        Plaintiff - Appellee,

  v.                                                         No. 23-6072
                                                     (D.C. No. 5:22-CR-00294-G-1)
  SERGIO RESENDIZ-OLGUIN,                                    (W.D. Okla.)
  a/k/a Gerardo Rangel Torres,

        Defendant - Appellant.
                       _________________________________

                              ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
                          _________________________________

 Before HARTZ, MATHESON, and CARSON, Circuit Judges.
                  _________________________________

       Sergio Resendiz-Olguin has filed an appeal in this criminal case. The

 government moves to enforce the appeal waiver in his plea agreement. See United

 States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1328 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam).

 Mr. Resendiz-Olguin has responded, through counsel, informing us that he does not

 object to the government’s motion. Based on the parties’ positions and our

 independent review of the record, we grant the government’s motion and dismiss this

 appeal.

                                             Entered for the Court
                                             Per Curiam

       *
          This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines
 of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for
 its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.