UNITED STATES v. REDDIX (2019)

Terry Lee Reddix appeals his below-guidelines sentence after pleading guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute. Reddix challenges the sentence as procedurally unreasonable on the basis that the district court erroneously imposed enhancements to his guidelines range without sufficient evidence. The Government moves to dismiss the appeal because of an appeal waiver in Reddix’s plea agreement; alternatively, it moves for summary affirmance.

We review de novo whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal. United States v. Keele, 755 F.3d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 2014). Based on our review of the record, Reddix knowingly and voluntarily entered his plea agreement, including the appeal waiver, which is enforceable and bars his appeal. See United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746 (5th Cir. 2005). There is no merit to Reddix’s contention that his appeal waiver was unknowing because he entered into it prior to sentencing and without knowledge of his ultimate sentence. See United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 567-68 (5th Cir. 1992).

We GRANT the Government’s motion to dismiss and need not address the alternate motion for summary affirmance.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.