United States v. James Liken, 692 F. App'x 740

Defendant James Loyal Liken pleaded guilty, via written plea agreement, to multiple counts including armed bank robbery with abduction and related offenses.
Plea agreement contained a broad appeal waiver covering “whatever sentence is imposed on any ground, including any issues that relate to the establishment of the advisory Guideline range.”
District court calculated a Sentencing Guidelines range of 135–168 months and imposed concurrent 147-month terms of imprisonment.
Liken appealed the district court’s application of a four-level abduction enhancement that increased his offense level and Guidelines range.
The Government moved to dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver in the plea agreement.
The Fourth Circuit reviewed the validity and scope of the waiver de novo, examined the plea colloquy, and dismissed the appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of appeal waiver	Liken implicitly contests sentence by challenging enhancement (argues district court erred in applying abduction enhancement).	Government: waiver was knowingly and intelligently entered, so enforceable.	Waiver is valid; plea colloquy shows Liken agreed knowingly and intelligently.
Scope of waiver (challenge to Guidelines calculation)	Liken argues the abduction enhancement was improperly applied to increase his offense level.	Government: waiver expressly bars appeals relating to establishment of advisory Guidelines range; exceptions not applicable.	Appeal falls within the waiver’s scope; challenge barred and appeal dismissed.

United States v. Thornsbury, 670 F.3d 532 (4th Cir. 2012) (appeal waiver bars appeals within its valid scope)
United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621 (4th Cir. 2010) (benchmarks for knowing and intelligent plea/wavier determination)