Kenneth Tillman pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and possession of a firearm and ammunition by a prohibited person. Although the advisory sentencing guidelines range was 92 to 115 months, the district court sentenced him to 80 months in prison. Following his conviction and sentence, Tillman filed a notice of appeal. The government subsequently moved to enforce the appeal waiver contained in his plea agreement, arguing that the appeal was barred. Meanwhile, Tillman's counsel filed a response to the government's motion and moved to withdraw from the case, asserting that a thorough and conscientious review of the record revealed no non-frivolous issues to support the appeal.
The Tenth Circuit applied the three-part test from United States v. Hahn to determine whether to enforce the appeal waiver. The court found that the disputed appeal fell within the scope of the waiver, that Tillman knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights, and that enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. The court conducted a full examination of all proceedings, consistent with the requirements of Anders v. California. After this review, the court agreed with the government that there was no non-frivolous basis to oppose the motion to enforce the waiver. Consequently, the court determined that the waiver was valid and enforceable, necessitating the dismissal of the appeal.
The appeal is dismissed, meaning the 80-month sentence stands as entered by the district court. The government's motion to enforce the waiver is granted, reinforcing the binding nature of plea agreement conditions in the Tenth Circuit. Additionally, Tillman's counsel is permitted to withdraw from the case, closing the representation on appeal. The court's order notes that it is not binding precedent except under specific doctrines like law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel, though it may be cited for persuasive value.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download