Court Opinion

ID: 9377580
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-08 14:01:28.160552+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:15.051038
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-12660    Document: 17-1     Date Filed: 03/08/2023   Page: 1 of 5

                                               [DO NOT PUBLISH]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

                          ____________________

                                No. 22-12660
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiff-Appellee,
       versus
       VIRGIL DENNARD,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Middle District of Alabama
                 D.C. Docket No. 2:21-cr-00336-RAH-CWB-1
                           ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-12660     Document: 17-1      Date Filed: 03/08/2023    Page: 2 of 5

       2                      Opinion of the Court                22-12660

       Before WILSON, LUCK, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Virgil Dennard appeals his 240-month imprisonment sen-
       tence for possession with intent to distribute 5 or more grams of
       methamphetamine. The government moves to dismiss Dennard’s
       appeal based on the appeal waiver in his plea agreement.
              Dennard argues that the district court erred in failing to
       award him a downward variance because it failed to appropriately
       weigh relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. He contends that he
       cooperated with the government and the information he provided
       warranted a greater variance than he received. Dennard argues
       that a 60-month sentence would be more appropriate.
              In response, the government moves this Court to dismiss
       the appeal because of Dennard’s binding appeal waiver in the plea
       agreement. The government notes that Dennard waived his right
       to appeal for any reason other than prosecutorial misconduct and
       ineffective assistance of counsel, and the waiver provision was
       clearly set apart in the plea agreement with a bolded, all-caps head-
       ing, “Defendant’s Waiver of Appeal and Collateral Attack.” The
       government also argues that because the agreement included a
       confirmation that Dennard’s attorney advised him of the rights he
       was waiving and because Dennard signed the agreement, it was
       manifestly clear that Dennard understood he was waiving his right
       to appeal. Additionally, the government contends that during the
USCA11 Case: 22-12660      Document: 17-1     Date Filed: 03/08/2023     Page: 3 of 5

       22-12660               Opinion of the Court                         3

       plea colloquy at the change of plea hearing, Dennard confirmed
       that he had read the plea agreement and discussed it with his law-
       yer before signing it. It also notes that the judge directly asked
       Dennard if he understood the rights he was waiving, and Dennard
       responded that he did. The government argues that the plea collo-
       quy followed the terms of the plea agreement, laid out Dennard’s
       right to an appeal in the ordinary course, and made clear that by
       entering the agreement, Dennard was waiving his right to appeal,
       making it manifestly clear that he knowingly and voluntarily
       waived the right to appeal his sentence.
               This Court reviews the validity of a sentence appeal waiver
       de novo. United States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 1064, 1066 (11th Cir.
       2008). A sentence appeal waiver will be enforced if it was made
       knowingly and voluntarily. United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d
       1343, 1351 (11th Cir. 1993). To establish that the waiver was made
       knowingly and voluntarily, the government must show either that:
       (1) the district court specifically questioned the defendant about the
       waiver during the plea colloquy; or (2) the record makes clear that
       the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the
       waiver. Id. The government cannot show that an appeal waiver
       was knowing and voluntary from an examination of the agree-
       ment’s text alone. Id. at 1352. There is a strong presumption that
       statements made during the Rule 11 colloquy are true. United
       States v. Medlock, 12 F.3d 185, 187 (11th Cir. 1994). This Court has
       enforced an appeal waiver where the waiver was mentioned dur-
       ing the plea colloquy and the defendant said that she understood
USCA11 Case: 22-12660      Document: 17-1     Date Filed: 03/08/2023     Page: 4 of 5

       4                      Opinion of the Court                 22-12660

       the appeal waiver. See United States v. Weaver, 275 F.3d 1320,
       1333 (11th Cir. 2001).
               Here, we conclude that Dennard knowingly and voluntarily
       waived his right to appeal his sentence. Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351.
       At the change-of-plea hearing, the court confirmed that Dennard
       had reviewed the plea agreement before signing it, discussed it with
       his attorney, and understood it. And the court asked Dennard if he
       understood that he was waiving the right to appeal except on
       grounds of prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of
       counsel, and Dennard responded that he understood. The appeal
       waiver was also referenced in the plea colloquy, which this Court
       found was sufficient to enforce an appeal waiver in Weaver, 275
       F.3d at 1333. Further, Dennard’s argument on appeal, that the dis-
       trict court did not properly consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors,
       does not fit within the exceptions of the appeal waiver.
              Thus, the Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pur-
       suant 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. Bascomb, 451
       F.3d 1292, 1297 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding that the defendant know-
       ingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal a sentence on the
       ground that its length, which was below the statutory maximum,
       was cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment); United
       States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005)
USCA11 Case: 22-12660     Document: 17-1      Date Filed: 03/08/2023    Page: 5 of 5

       22-12660               Opinion of the Court                        5

       (waiver of the right to appeal includes waiver of the right to appeal
       difficult or debatable legal issues or even blatant error).