Background
Rick Tariq Rahim appealed his convictions and a seventy-eight month aggregate sentence imposed after he pled guilty to willful failure to account for and pay taxes and wire fraud. Counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California indicating no potentially meritorious issues but questioning whether the district court complied with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure eleven. The government moved to dismiss the appeals based on appellate waivers in the plea agreements.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the validity of the appeal waiver de novo and enforced it because the defendant knowingly and intelligently agreed to the waiver. The court looked to the totality of circumstances, including the defendant’s experience and understanding of the plea agreement terms. The court concluded that the defendant understood the full significance of the waiver during the Rule eleven colloquy. The court also reviewed the entire record for any potentially meritorious issues outside the scope of the waivers and found none.
What it means going forward
Defendants who sign broad appeal waivers in plea agreements will likely find their appeals dismissed on waived issues, even if they raise procedural questions about the plea colloquy.