USCA11 Case: 20-10972 Date Filed: 12/08/2020 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 20-10972
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:19-cr-00113-SCB-AAS-2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JORGE MONTENEGRO CORTES,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(December 8, 2020)
Before LAGOA, BRASHER and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal waiver
in Appellant’s plea agreement is GRANTED. As the record reveals, Cortes
knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his sentence. See United States
USCA11 Case: 20-10972 Date Filed: 12/08/2020 Page: 2 of 3
v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350-51 (11th Cir. 1993) (holding that a sentence appeal
waiver will be enforced if it was made knowingly and voluntarily). At the plea
colloquy, the magistrate judge specifically questioned Cortes, through an interpreter,
about the sentence appeal waiver. The magistrate judge correctly explained the
waiver’s terms, including its exceptions, and Cortes confirmed, under oath, that he
understood. Further, although Cortes’s hearings were conducted through an
interpreter, the record does not indicate that he was confused at the proceedings --
rather, he contested his knowledge of the quantity or substance on the vessel,
revealing that he was aware of the allegations against him and followed the
proceedings. Moreover, nothing in the record undermines the presumption that
Cortes’s statement at the hearing were truthful. United States v. Medlock, 12 F.3d
185, 187 (11th Cir. 1994) (noting the strong presumption that the statements made
during a plea colloquy are true). Thus, on the record before us, Cortes knowingly
and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement. See Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1350-51;
see also United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005)
(noting that the waiver of the right to appeal includes the waiver of the right to appeal
difficult or debatable legal issues or even blatant error).
Additionally, none of the exceptions to the sentence appeal waiver apply here.
For starters, the district court adopted the presentence investigation report (“PSI”),
which concluded that Cortes’s guideline range was 108 to 135-months’
2
USCA11 Case: 20-10972 Date Filed: 12/08/2020 Page: 3 of 3
imprisonment, and the district court sentenced Cortes to 108 months’ imprisonment.
None of the other exceptions apply because Cortes’s sentence was below the
statutory maximum, he does not raise any Eighth Amendment challenges, and the
government did not initiate the instant appeal. Therefore, we conclude that Cortes’s
sentence appeal waiver is valid and enforceable, and we dismiss the appeal. See
Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d at 1297.
DISMISSED.
3