Court Opinion

ID: 9375321
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-27 16:00:44.703329+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:57.817935
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-60878        Document: 00516654048            Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/23/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit

                                                                                     FILED
                                                                              February 23, 2023
                                       No. 21-60878
                                                                                Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                     Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                           versus

   John Wayne Spell,

                                                                Defendant—Appellant.

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Southern District of Mississippi
                               USDC No. 3:19-CR-114

   Before Jones, Smith, and Graves, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
         John Wayne Spell pleaded guilty to possession of material involving
   the sexual exploitation of minors. The district court sentenced Spell and
   ordered restitution.      Despite the appellate waiver included in his plea
   agreement, Spell now challenges his sentence and the award of restitution.
   After due consideration, we DISMISS the appeal.

         *   This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 21-60878     Document: 00516654048           Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/23/2023

                                    No. 21-60878

                  FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

          Spell pleaded guilty to one count of possession of child pornography
   in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). As part of his written plea
   agreement, Spell waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence, or
   the manner in which it was imposed, on any ground. The district court
   sentenced Spell to 120 months of imprisonment, 30 years of supervised
   release, and imposed a $10,000 assessment pursuant to the Amy, Vicky, and
   Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act of 2018. The judgment of
   conviction was entered on November 17, 2021. Spell filed a notice of appeal
   on November 17, 2021. Following a restitution hearing, the judgment was
   amended on January 25, 2022, to include restitution in the amount of
   $52,000. Spell filed an amended notice of appeal to include the restitution
   issue on February 9, 2022.
          On May 16, 2022, the government filed a motion to dismiss or,
   alternatively, for summary affirmance on the basis of the appeal waiver. Spell
   filed opposition. The motion was carried with the case.
                          STANDARD OF REVIEW
          A defendant may waive his statutory right to appeal pursuant to a valid
   plea agreement so long as his waiver is knowing and voluntary. United States
   v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746 (5th Cir. 2005). This court reviews de novo
   the issue of whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal. United States v. Keele,
   755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 2014). “To determine the validity of an appeal
   waiver, this court conducts a two-step inquiry. Specifically, this court
   considers whether the waiver was knowing and voluntary and whether, under
   the plain language of the plea agreement, the waiver applies to the
   circumstances at issue.” Id. “In determining whether a waiver applies, this
   court employs ordinary principles of contract interpretation, construing
   waivers narrowly and against the Government.” Id.

                                         2
Case: 21-60878      Document: 00516654048          Page: 3   Date Filed: 02/23/2023

                                    No. 21-60878

                                  DISCUSSION
          Spell asserts that the district court ordered an unreasonably high
   sentence and an unreasonable restitution award. Spell concedes that the
   relief sought is against Fifth Circuit precedent. However, he asserts that his
   arguments raise “important public policy and constitutional concerns that
   may warrant en banc consideration by this court and/or consideration by the
   United States Supreme Court.” Spell also asserts that the appeal waiver
   should not be enforced because he did not know what his sentence would be
   when he pleaded guilty. We disagree.
          This court recently considered a similar matter in United States v.
   Meredith, 52 F.4th 984 (5th Cir. 2022). In that case, Christopher Meredith
   attempted to appeal a sentencing enhancement and restitution award after
   waiving his right to appeal. This court concluded that Meredith’s waiver
   foreclosed his arguments on appeal and dismissed his appeal. Id. at 988.
   Meredith waived his right to appeal “on any ground,” including as to any
   “monetary penalty or obligation.” Id. at 986. This court also concluded that
   the waiver was knowing and voluntary.
          Spell agreed to waive his right to appeal the conviction and sentence
   in this matter on any ground under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 or “on any ground
   whatsoever.” Pursuant to the plea agreement and supplement, Spell also
   agreed to make full restitution to all victims. Spell’s agreement did not
   include specific language waiving his right to appeal as to any “monetary
   penalty or obligation.” See Meredith, 52 F.4th at 986. However, in Keele, this
   court concluded that restitution was encompassed by a general waiver such
   as the one here. Id., 755 F.3d at 756.
          Additionally, this court has already disagreed with Spell’s argument
   regarding his uncertainty of sentence at the time he pleaded guilty. See

                                            3
Case: 21-60878     Document: 00516654048          Page: 4   Date Filed: 02/23/2023

                                   No. 21-60878

   United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 567-68 (5th Cir. 1992) (“uncertainty
   of Appellant’s sentence does not render his waiver uninformed.”).
          Moreover, the record in this matter supports a conclusion that Spell
   knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights. Spell signed a written
   provision on the plea agreement and supplement affirming that he had read
   the agreement, his attorney had explained it, he understood it, and he had
   entered into it voluntarily and knowingly. Before Spell’s plea was accepted,
   he testified that he had read the plea agreement and supplement, discussed it
   with counsel, and understood it. The district court also went over specific
   provisions, including the waiver, and Spell reiterated his voluntary
   agreement.
         For these reasons, Spell’s appeal is DISMISSED.                   The
   government’s motion to dismiss or, alternatively, for summary affirmance is
   DISMISSED as moot.

                                        4