Luis Angel Rios, a non-citizen and native Spanish speaker, was arrested after federal agents observed him distributing cocaine to his nephew. He was indicted on multiple drug and gun counts but ultimately pleaded guilty to one count of maintaining a drug-trafficking place and one count of attempting to distribute cocaine. In exchange for the government dropping the other charges and recommending a favorable sentence, Rios signed a broad plea agreement waiving all rights to appeal his conviction or sentence, including issues regarding the sentencing guidelines or the reasonableness of the sentence. At sentencing, the district court overruled Rios's objections, calculated a guidelines range of 168 to 210 months, and sentenced him to 108 months of imprisonment plus five years of supervised release. Rios then filed an appeal, prompting his appointed counsel to file a motion to withdraw under the standard set forth in Anders v. California, asserting that the appeal was frivolous.
The Seventh Circuit addressed the motion to withdraw by first examining whether counsel properly considered potential challenges to the validity of Rios's guilty plea. The court noted that counsel failed to consult with Rios regarding a plea withdrawal, which is a procedural error under Seventh Circuit precedent. However, the court found this error harmless because the plea transcript demonstrated that the district court substantially complied with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. The record showed that Rios understood the charges, penalties, and the effect of his appellate waiver. Although the judge omitted a specific inquiry about force, threats, or promises, the plea agreement itself contained a statement confirming no such coercion occurred, rendering the omission harmless. Next, the court addressed the enforceability of the appeal waiver. The court reasoned that an appeal waiver stands or falls with the underlying plea; since the plea was valid, the waiver was enforceable. The court found no exceptions applied because Rios's sentence did not exceed statutory maximums and there was no evidence of constitutionally impermissible factors. Finally, because Rios failed to respond to the motion to withdraw and counsel identified no non-frivolous issues, the court concluded the appeal was frivolous.
The appeal is dismissed, leaving the district court's sentence of 108 months and five years of supervised release in place. The decision reinforces the strict enforcement of broad appeal waivers in plea agreements when the underlying plea is procedurally sound. It also clarifies that while counsel must consult with clients before dismissing a plea challenge in an Anders brief, the failure to do so does not automatically invalidate the appeal if the plea record otherwise demonstrates compliance with Rule 11.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download