United States v. Jasper Blackshear

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: February 23, 2023
• Docket: 22-12166
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

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[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit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