UNITED STATES v. OBREGON (2021)

Ivan Dario Obregon pleaded guilty to possessing with the intent to distribute 100 grams or more of heroin, an offense punishable by between five and 40 years of imprisonment. 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B)(i). Finding that Obregon was eligible to benefit from 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1)’s safety valve provision as amended by the First Step Act, the district court varied downward from the applicable guidelines imprisonment range and sentenced Obregon below the statutory minimum to a 54-month prison term.

On appeal, Obregon raises claims of procedural error relating to the district court's calculation of his guidelines sentencing range. The Government argues that Obregon's claims are barred by the appeal waiver provision in his plea agreement.

We review de novo whether an appeal waiver bars an appeal. United States v. Jacobs, 635 F.3d 778, 780-81 (5th Cir. 2011). The record reflects that Obregon's appeal waiver was knowing and voluntary, see United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746 (5th Cir. 2005), and Obregon concedes as much. In addition, the language of the appeal waiver applies to Obregon's appellate arguments. See Jacobs, 635 F.3d at 781. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM:*