FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS July 14, 2009
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 09-4054
(D.C. No. 2:06-CR-00851-TS-1)
RUBEN SERRATO, (D. Utah)
Defendant-Appellant.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before TACHA, TYMKOVICH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.
This matter is before the court on the government’s motion to enforce the
appeal waiver contained in defendant’s plea agreement. The motion is filed
pursuant to United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc)
(per curiam). In response, defendant, through counsel, states that summary
disposition of the direct appeal is appropriate. Resp. at 2, 7. Defendant does not
*
This panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not
materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2);
10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral
argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the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.
concede that he knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights, or that
enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. Id. at 2-6; see
Hahn, 359 F.3d at 1325 (identifying factors used to determine if appeal waiver is
valid). Rather, he contends these issues, and any potential
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims, would be better addressed in a collateral
proceeding. Resp. at 2-7.
Accordingly, the government’s motion is GRANTED, and the appeal is
DISMISSED.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
PER CURIAM
-2-