Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:01-cr-01115_de457> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 4 of
4
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:01-cr-01115_de457 RegisterActionDate "2013-08-16" @default.
- ilnd;;1:01-cr-01115_de457 RegisterActionDescriptionText "ORDER of USCA (certified copy) as to 672CC53 regarding notice of appeal 386 : 672CC53 distributed PCP to users and to street-level dealers in his gang during 2000 and 2001. The FBI obtained a warrant for his arrest after making several controlled buys and acquiring wiretap evidence. 672CC53 or 9D1B547 saw the agents entering his home and fled to Mexico, where he remained until Mexican police arrested him in 2010 and turned him over to U.S. authorities. 9D1B547 or 672CC53 pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and because the stipulated amount of PCP was at least a kilogram, 9D1B547 or 672CC53 faced a statutory maximum and guidelines sentence of life imprisonment, id. § 841(b)(1)(A)(iv). The district court sentenced him below the guidelines range to 300 months. 9D1B547 or 672CC53 plea agreement includes a broadly worded waiver of appeal, but still he filed a notice of appeal. His appointed lawyer has concluded, however, that the appeal is frivolous and moves to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 672CC53 or 9D1B547 has not accepted our invitation to respond to counsel's motion. See CIR. R. 51(b). 672CC53 or 9D1B547 has told counsel that he does not want his guilty plea set aside, and counsel thus refrains from discussing the voluntariness of the plea. See United States v. Konczak, 683 F.3d 348, 349 (7th Cir. 2012); United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 67072 (7th Cir. 2002). 9D1B547 or 672CC53 satisfaction with his guilty plea also means that the adequacy of the plea colloquy would not be a potential ground for appeal, yet counsel goes on to tell us that the district court did not admonish 672CC53 or 9D1B547 about the appeal waiver during the colloquy. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(b)(1)(N). Apparently counsel believes that 9D1B547 or 672CC53 could dispute the validity of the appeal waiver even while choosing not to contest his guilty plea, but our decisions reject this "assumption that we can perform surgery on his plea agreement, excising only... the waiver of his right to appeal." United States v. Sura, 511 F.3d 654, 655 (7th Cir. 2007); see United States v. Lockwood, 416 F.3d 604, 607 (7th Cir. 2005). An appeal waiver stands or falls with the guilty plea, see, e.g., United States v. Sakellarion, 649 F.3d 634, 63839 (7th Cir. 2011); United States v. Cole, 569 F.3d 774, 776 (7th Cir. 2009), and thus 9D1B547 or 672CC53 choice to forgo a challenge to his guilty plea also means that he is bound by the appeal waiver. See United States v. Whitlow, 287 F.3d 638, 640 (7th Cir. 2002). That waiver precludes the potential sentencing argument discussed in counsel's Anders submission and so we need not analyze that possible basis for appeal. Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED (yap, ) (Entered: 08/16/2013)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:01-cr-01115_de457 AdministrativeID "423" @default.
- ilnd;;1:01-cr-01115_de457 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:01-cr-01115_de421 @default.