United States v. Brandon Jamal Thurmond

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedMay 2, 2025
Docket24-11518
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Brandon Jamal Thurmond (United States v. Brandon Jamal Thurmond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Brandon Jamal Thurmond, (11th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 24-11518 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 05/02/2025 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-11518 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus BRANDON JAMAL THURMOND,

Defendant- Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cr-00021-JRH-BKE-1 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 24-11518 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 05/02/2025 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 24-11518

Before LUCK, LAGOA, and WILSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal waiver in Appellant’s plea agreement is GRANTED.1 See United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1345, 1350–51 (11th Cir. 1993) (holding that we will enforce sentence appeal waivers if they are made “knowingly and voluntarily”); United States v. Boyd, 975 F.3d 1185, 1192 (11th Cir. 2020) (noting that the “touchstone” for assessing if a sentence appeal waiver was made knowingly and voluntarily is whether it was clearly conveyed to the defendant that he was giving up his right to appeal under most circumstances); United States v. Weaver, 275 F.3d 1320, 1333 (11th Cir. 2001) (con- cluding that an appeal waiver was enforceable where the court ref- erenced the waiver provision during the plea colloquy and the de- fendant confirmed that he understood the waiver provision and en- tered into it voluntarily and freely).

1 Counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel is DENIED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. James Bushert
997 F.2d 1343 (Eleventh Circuit, 1993)
United States v. Allandoe C. Boyd
975 F.3d 1185 (Eleventh Circuit, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Brandon Jamal Thurmond, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-brandon-jamal-thurmond-ca11-2025.