Court Opinion

ID: 9954190
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-25 20:01:27.205473+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:11:59.498069
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-12924    Document: 36-1     Date Filed: 03/25/2024   Page: 1 of 2

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]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

                          ____________________

                                No. 23-12924
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
       versus
       DANIELA RENDON,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Florida
                   D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cr-20036-KMM-1
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 23-12924      Document: 36-1      Date Filed: 03/25/2024     Page: 2 of 2

       2                      Opinion of the Court                  23-12924

       Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, and JORDAN and LAGOA, Cir-
       cuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              The Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant
       to the appeal waiver in Appellant’s plea agreement is GRANTED.
       See United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350-51 (11th Cir. 1993)
       (sentence appeal waiver will be enforced if it was made knowingly
       and voluntarily); United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d 1294, 1296
       (11th Cir. 2005) (waiver of the right to appeal includes waiver of
       the right to appeal difficult or debatable legal issues or even blatant
       error); King v. United States, 41 F. 4th 1363, 1369 (11th Cir. 2022)
       (appeal waivers “account in advance for unpredicted future devel-
       opments in the law” (quoting Oliver v. United States, 951 F.3d 841,
       845 (7th Cir. 2020))).