693 F. App'x 459
7th Cir.2017Background
- Navarro pled guilty to conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 & 841(a)(1).
- The plea agreement included a government promise to recommend a sentence within the Guidelines range and a broad waiver of appellate rights.
- At initial sentencing the government breached that promise and recommended 320 months; the court imposed 262 months; this court remanded for resentencing before a different judge.
- While the appeal was pending, the Sentencing Commission retroactively lowered the base offense level for most drug offenses (Amendments 782 & 788); at resentencing the parties agreed the reduced Guidelines applied, yielding a 151–188 month range.
- On remand the government recommended 188 months (within the plea agreement); the district court imposed 188 months. Navarro filed a second appeal despite the waiver; appointed counsel moved to withdraw under Anders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of appellate waiver | Navarro argues waiver may be unenforceable and thus he can appeal | Government relies on the guilty plea and waiver to bar the appeal | Waiver is enforceable; Navarro forfeited any challenge by not contesting his plea earlier; appeal barred |
| Whether district court complied with remand and Rule 51(b) claims (forfeiture) | Navarro contends remand compliance and forfeiture obligations were not addressed | District court complied and the waiver bars these claims | Claims foreclosed by waiver; no viable challenge |
| Consideration of post-sentencing rehabilitation in § 3582(c)(2) reduction | Navarro says court failed to consider all rehabilitative efforts (e.g., drug program) | Court considered relevant developments (GED, conduct record) and is not required to mention every program or give particular weight | Court satisfied § 3582(c)(2) and § 3553(a) requirements; not required to give particular weight to post‑sentencing rehab; claim would be frivolous |
| Counsel’s Anders motion to withdraw | Counsel says appeal is frivolous and seeks to withdraw | Navarro opposes withdrawal and presses arguments | Court grants counsel’s motion to withdraw and dismisses the appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedure for counsel to withdraw when appeal appears frivolous)
- United States v. Navarro, 817 F.3d 494 (7th Cir. 2016) (prior opinion remanding for resentencing after government breached plea recommendation)
- United States v. Purnell, 701 F.3d 1186 (7th Cir. 2012) (district court may, but need not, consider post‑sentencing rehabilitation under § 3582(c)(2))
- United States v. Clayton, 811 F.3d 918 (7th Cir. 2016) (district court must provide some § 3553(a)-consistent reasoning for § 3582 decisions)
- United States v. Longstreet, 669 F.3d 834 (7th Cir. 2012) (challenge to plea and appeal waiver must be raised with the guilty plea or is forfeited)
- United States v. Zitt, 714 F.3d 511 (7th Cir. 2013) (an appeal waiver stands or falls with the guilty plea)
- United States v. Bey, 748 F.3d 774 (7th Cir. 2014) (standards for reviewing Anders submissions and limited appellate review)
- United States v. Wagner, 103 F.3d 551 (7th Cir. 1996) (procedural guidance for appellate counsel and Anders practice)