United States v. Owolabi Paul Hammed
This text of United States v. Owolabi Paul Hammed (United States v. Owolabi Paul Hammed) 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.
Opinion
Case: 18-12345 Date Filed: 05/15/2019 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________
No. 18-12345 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________
D.C. Docket No. 0:17-cr-60321-BB-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
OWOLABI PAUL HAMMED,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________
(May 15, 2019)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, BRANCH, and GRANT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Owolabi Hammed appeals the substantive reasonableness of his aggregate
61-month sentence for his convictions for bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Case: 18-12345 Date Filed: 05/15/2019 Page: 2 of 3
§ 1344, aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1), and
access device fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2), to which he pleaded
guilty. The government argues that this appeal should be dismissed based on the
sentence appeal waiver in Hammed’s written 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). A sentence appeal
waiver will be enforced if it was made knowingly and voluntarily. United States v.
Buchanan, 131 F.3d 1005, 1008 (11th Cir. 1997). To establish that the waiver was
made knowingly and voluntarily, the government must show either that: (1) the
district court specifically questioned the defendant about the waiver during the plea
colloquy; or (2) the record makes clear that the defendant otherwise understood the
full significance of the waiver. Id. The valid waiver of the right to appeal
“includes the waiver of the right to appeal difficult or debatable legal issues or
even blatant error.” United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th
Cir. 2005).
Hammed’s plea agreement included the following appeal waiver:
[I]n exchange for the undertakings made by the United States in this plea agreement, the Defendant hereby waives all rights conferred by [18 U.S.C. §] 3742 and [28 U.S.C. §] 1291 to appeal any sentence imposed, including any restitution order, or to appeal the manner in which the sentence was imposed, unless the sentence exceeds the maximum permitted by statute or is the result of an upward departure and/or an upward variance from the advisory guideline range that the
2 Case: 18-12345 Date Filed: 05/15/2019 Page: 3 of 3
Court establishes at sentencing. . . . However, if the United States appeals the Defendant’s sentence pursuant to Sections 3742(b) and 1291, the Defendant shall be released from the above waiver of appellate rights. By signing this agreement, the Defendant acknowledges that the Defendant has discussed the appeal waiver set forth in this agreement with the Defendant’s attorney.
Doc. 53 at 6 (emphases added).
At his sentencing hearing, the district court specifically questioned Hammed
about his understanding of the appeal waiver, and he acknowledged to the court
that he signed a plea agreement containing the waiver, that he understood the
sentence appeal waiver and its exceptions, and that he discussed the sentence
appeal waiver with his attorney. The district court correctly concluded that
Hammed agreed to the sentence appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily. See
Buchanan, 131 F.3d at 1008 (finding an appeal waiver was made “knowingly and
voluntarily” because the district court’s “colloquy establishes that the defendant
understood the nature and extent of the appeal waiver and agreed to it”).
Furthermore, the three exceptions to Hammed’s appeal waiver—an appeal by the
government, a total sentence exceeding the maximum permitted by statute, or a
total sentence that is the result of an upward departure and/or an upward variance
from the advisory guideline range—are not present. Accordingly, we will enforce
Hammed’s appeal waiver and dismiss this appeal.
DISMISSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Owolabi Paul Hammed, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-owolabi-paul-hammed-ca11-2019.