Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
United States of America v. JAIME ENRIQUE OLIVARRIA-LORA
Case Number: 06-4220
Judge: ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Before MURPHY, TYMKOVICH, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.
Court: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office
Denver, CO - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant with
one count of possessing with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine charge.
Defendant Jaime Enrique Olivarria-Lora pleaded guilty to one count of
possessing with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Pursuant to the plea agreement, defendant
“knowingly, voluntarily and expressly waive[d his] right to appeal any sentence
imposed upon [him], and the manner in which the sentence is determined,
on . . . any ground whatever, except [he did] not waive [his] right to appeal a
sentence above the maximum penalty provided in the statute of conviction. . . .”
Plea Agreement dated June 14, 2006, at 3. The district court imposed a
168-month sentence on defendant, which is within the guideline range and
below the maximum sentence of life under defendant’s statute of conviction.
Defendant filed a notice of appeal challenging his sentence. His attorney
filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), stating
his belief that there are no meritorious grounds upon which defendant can appeal
his conviction or sentence because he entered into a valid waiver of his right to
appeal, and the district court sentenced defendant within the guideline range
established by defendant’s criminal history and offense level. The government
did not submit a brief. This court gave defendant an opportunity to file additional
arguments to this court, see id., but to date, he has not responded.
In accordance with Anders, we have conducted an independent review of
the record to determine if any appeal would be frivolous. See id. This court will
enforce a criminal defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal so long as the
following three conditions are met: (1) “the disputed appeal falls within the
scope of the waiver of appellate rights,” (2) the defendant’s waiver of his
appellate rights was knowing and voluntary, and (3) “enforcing the waiver [will
not] result in a miscarriage of justice.” United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315,
Appellate Case: 06-4220 Document: 010140306 Date Filed: 09/26/2007 Page: 2
1325 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam).
Outcome: We conclude from our review of defendant’s brief, the plea agreement, and the transcripts of the plea and sentencing hearings, that, under Hahn, defendant has waived his right to appeal.
Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeal. The mandate shall issue forthwith.