[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
OCTOBER 27, 2006
No. 05-16985 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 05-80035-CR-WPD
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
WALTER JAMES HICKMAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(October 27, 2006)
Before BLACK, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Walter James Hickman appeals his conviction after he pled guilty to various
crack cocaine offenses, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Hickman asserts the
district court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence because the police
lacked probable cause for his arrest. We affirm Hickman’s conviction.
We review whether a voluntary, unconditional guilty plea waives a
defendant’s ability to appeal adverse rulings of pre-trial motions as a question of
law using a de novo standard. United States v. Patti, 337 F.3d 1317, 1320 n.4
(11th Cir. 2003). By entering a voluntary, unconditional guilty plea, a defendant
waives all non-jurisdictional defects in the proceedings. Id. at 1320. A district
court’s refusal to suppress evidence is non-jurisdictional and is waived by a guilty
plea. United States v. McCoy, 477 F.2d 550, 551 (5th Cir. 1973).1 “A defendant
who wishes to preserve appellate review of a non-jurisdictional defect while at the
same time pleading guilty can do so only by entering a ‘conditional plea’ in
accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2).” United States v. Pierre, 120 F.3d
1153, 1155 (11th Cir. 1997). Rule 11(a)(2) provides: “With the consent of the
court and the government, a defendant may enter a conditional plea of guilty or
1
In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), this
Court adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior
to close of business on September 30, 1981.
2
nolo contendere, reserving in writing the right to have an appellate court review an
adverse determination of a specified pretrial motion.”
Hickman entered into an unconditional guilty plea without making any kind
of written agreement and without expressing a desire to preserve his right to raise
the suppression issue on appeal. The district court explained to Hickman that he
would not be able to appeal his motion to suppress, and Hickman agreed. As
Hickman failed to preserve the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress,
a non-jurisdictional claim, he has waived his right to appeal this ruling.
AFFIRMED.
3