403 F. App'x 963
5th Cir.2010Background
- Barrett pleaded guilty to a superseding indictment charging access device fraud and wire fraud.
- District court sentenced Barrett to 120 months on each count, to be served concurrently.
- Barrett challenges the sentence as to the application of U.S.S.G. § 3C1.3 and 18 U.S.C. § 3147.
- Barrett accepted a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, with reserved rights to challenge certain conditions.
- The Government seeks to enforce the waiver; the court applies a two-step inquiry for knowing voluntariness and applicability.
- The court holds the appeal waiver applies and DISMISSES the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the appeal waiver applicable to Barrett’s challenge? | Barrett argues waiver doesn't bar the arithmetic challenge. | Government asserts waiver is valid and governs the appeal. | Waiver applies; appeal dismissed. |
| Did the district court err in applying §3C1.3 and §3147 by failing to apportion the sentence? | Barrett contends improper apportionment; arithmetic error. | Waived dispute; guidelines require apportionment but not a pure formula. | Issue dismissed as waived; no reversal on apportionment. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542 (5th Cir. 2005) (interpretation of plea agreements by contract-like reading; two-step waiver analysis)
- United States v. Dison, 573 F.3d 204 (5th Cir. 2009) (3C1.3 adjustment tied to § 3147 enhancements)
- United States v. Story, 439 F.3d 226 (5th Cir. 2006) (appeal-waiver enforcement governing procedures)