Opinion
22-2040
02-06-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ABEL MANUELITO CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
(D.C. No. 1:21-CR-01519-KWR-1) (D. N.M.)
Before TYMKOVICH, EBEL, and CARSON, Circuit Judges.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM
Abel Manuelito Chavez pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, and he received an 87-month prison sentence. He has appealed from that sentence despite the appeal waiver in his plea agreement. The government now moves to enforce that waiver under United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1328 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc). Chavez has filed a response through counsel, and he now concedes that the appeal waiver is enforceable.
When deciding a motion to enforce an appeal waiver, we normally ask: "(1) whether the disputed appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate rights; (2) whether the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights; and (3) whether enforcing the waiver would result in a miscarriage of justice." Id. at 1325. But we need not address a Hahn factor the defendant does not dispute. See United States v. Porter, 405 F.3d 1136, 1143 (10th Cir. 2005). Chavez has conceded the government's motion and therefore does not address the Hahn factors. Accordingly, we do not address them either.
We grant the government's motion and dismiss this appeal.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.