USCA11 Case: 22-12166 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 02/23/2023 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 22-12166
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JASPER BLACKSHEAR,
a.k.a. BO LOCK,
Defendant-Appellant.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Georgia
D.C. Docket No. 5:21-cr-00038-MTT-CHW-1
USCA11 Case: 22-12166 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 02/23/2023 Page: 2 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 22-12166
____________________
Before ROSENBAUM, JILL PRYOR, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Jason Blackshear appeals his 130-month sentence for con-
spiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of
21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C). In response, the govern-
ment has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the ap-
peal waiver in Blackshear’s plea agreement.
We review the validity of a sentence appeal waiver de novo.
United States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 1064, 1066 (11th Cir. 2008).
We grant the government’s motion to dismiss the appeal
pursuant to the appeal waiver in Blackshear’s plea agreement.
Blackshear’s appeal waiver is enforceable, as the record shows that
he knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal. See
United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350–51 (11th Cir. 1993)
(explaining that sentence appeal waiver will be enforced if it was
made knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Bascomb, 451
F.3d 1292, 1297 (11th Cir. 2006) (stating that an appeal waiver “can-
not be vitiated or altered by comments the court makes during sen-
tencing”); United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d 1294, 1296
(11th Cir. 2005) (explaining that a waiver of the right to appeal in-
cludes waiver of the right to appeal difficult or debatable legal is-
sues or even blatant error). Indeed, the district court specifically
questioned Blackshear about the appeal waiver during the plea col-
loquy, and Blackshear confirmed at the plea colloquy that he read
USCA11 Case: 22-12166 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 02/23/2023 Page: 3 of 3
22-12166 Opinion of the Court 3
and understood the terms of the plea agreement and had no ques-
tions about the plea agreement. See Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351 (ex-
plaining that, to enforce a sentence appeal waiver, the “govern-
ment must show that either (1) the district court specifically ques-
tioned the defendant concerning the sentence appeal waiver during
the Rule 11 colloquy, or (2) it is manifestly clear from the record
that the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the
waiver”); see also United States v. Medlock, 12 F.3d 185, 187 (11th
Cir. 1994) (“There is a strong presumption that the statements
made during the [plea] colloquy are true.”). Further, Blackshear
does not argue that any of the exceptions specified in his appeal
waiver apply.
Accordingly, we GRANT the government’s motion to dis-
miss.
.