United States v. William Soloff, 993 F.3d 240

Soloff pleaded guilty to receipt of child pornography and signed a plea agreement containing an appellate waiver that surrendered all rights to appeal except for sentences above the Guidelines range, prosecutorial misconduct, or ineffective assistance of counsel.
A magistrate judge conducted the Rule 11 plea hearing, read the waiver into the record, confirmed Soloff understood the plea, and conditionally approved the plea agreement pending district-court action.
The district court also conditionally approved the agreement pending the PSR and, at sentencing, referenced the plea agreement and its appellate waiver but did not explicitly state on the record that it accepted the agreement.
The court imposed a 151-month sentence (the bottom of the agreed Guidelines range) and entered a restitution order stating it was “in accordance with the terms and conditions of Defendant’s plea agreement.”
Soloff appealed, arguing the appellate waiver is unenforceable because the district court never explicitly accepted the plea agreement; the Government moved to dismiss under the waiver.
The Fourth Circuit held the district court constructively accepted the plea agreement (including the waiver) based on the record and dismissed the appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether an appellate waiver in a plea agreement is unenforceable because the district court never explicitly accepted the plea agreement	Soloff: waiver not binding because district court did not expressly accept the plea agreement on the record	Government: waiver is enforceable where the record shows the court acknowledged and acted within the agreement's terms	Court: district court constructively accepted the plea agreement; waiver enforceable; appeal dismissed

United States v. McLaughlin, 813 F.3d 202 (4th Cir. 2016) (form should not prevail over substance when assessing Rule 11 and waiver enforceability)
United States v. McGrath, 981 F.3d 248 (4th Cir. 2020) (enforce waiver when appeal lies within waiver scope and no breach alleged)
United States v. Brown, 571 F.3d 690 (7th Cir. 2009) (recognizing constructive acceptance where court acknowledges agreement and operates within its terms)
United States v. Leyva-Matos, 618 F.3d 1213 (10th Cir. 2010) (same constructive-acceptance principle)
United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621 (4th Cir. 2010) (district court's Rule 11 deviations do not alone render waiver unenforceable)
United States v. Davis, 714 F.3d 809 (4th Cir. 2013) (limitations on restitution absent explicit agreement)
United States v. Skidmore, 998 F.2d 372 (6th Cir. 1993) (treating district court's failure to indicate plea-agreement status as acceptance when appropriate)