United States v. Coston
737 F.3d 235
2d Cir.2013Background
- Defendant-Appellant Rashod Coston pleaded guilty to one count of fraudulently using access devices to obtain items valued at $1,000 or more under 18 U.S.C. §1029(a)(2) & (c)(1)(A)(i).
- Plea agreement included a waiver of the right to appeal or collaterally attack any sentence of imprisonment of 120 months or less.
- District Court sentenced Coston principally to 27 months’ imprisonment.
- Coston challenges the sentence on procedural grounds, arguing the waiver is void or unenforceable and the sentence was procedurally flawed.
- Court first analyzes enforceability of the waiver under controlling Second Circuit standards before addressing the sentencing procedure argument.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the appeal waiver enforceable? | Coston contends the waiver is void or unenforceable due to unfair exchange. | Coston argues the district court failed to ensure waiver validity; however, the government asserts the waiver was knowing and voluntary. | Waiver is enforceable; record shows knowing, voluntary, and competent understanding. |
| Did procedural sentencing issues threaten the enforceability of the waiver? | Coston claims sentencing procedure was flawed, warranting appellate review despite the waiver. | Waiver bars review of sentence within the stipulated range and limits challenges to the procedure that would void the waiver. | Waiver enforceable; no colorable basis to override it, so procedural claim is not reached. |
| Did the district court’s in-chambers meeting affect the appeal waiver's validity or the sentence? | Coston argues a meeting in chambers impermissibly discussed sentencing issues off the record. | The record does not rely on the merits of the claim, and the preferred practice is to avoid off-record discussions. | Not reaching merits of that challenge; appellate procedure treated as within the waiver framework. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ready, 9 F.3d 551 (2d Cir. 1993) (waiver must be knowing and voluntary)
- United States v. Riggi, 649 F.3d 143 (2d Cir. 2011) (presume enforceability of appeal waivers)
- United States v. Gomez-Perez, 215 F.3d 315 (2d Cir. 2000) (waiver valid if knowingly and voluntarily provided)
- United States v. Liriano-Blanco, 510 F.3d 168 (2d Cir. 2007) (whether sentence was within plea agreement expectations)
- United States v. Goodman, 165 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 1999) (close look at unorthodox waivers and consideration)