Jolyn K. Furley pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and was sentenced to 168 months in prison, which sat at the low end of the advisory sentencing guidelines range of 168 to 210 months. Following her sentencing, she filed a notice of appeal. The government subsequently moved to enforce the appeal waiver contained in her plea agreement, arguing that her appeal was barred. In response, Furley's appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw, asserting that after a conscientious examination of the case, any opposition to the government's motion would be wholly frivolous. The court provided Furley an opportunity to file a pro se response, extending the deadline twice, but she failed to file one.
The Tenth Circuit applied the three-part test established in 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 Furley knowingly and voluntarily waived her appellate rights, and that enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. Consistent with the requirements of Anders v. California, the court conducted a full examination of the proceedings to ensure no non-frivolous arguments existed. After reviewing the record, the court agreed with counsel that there was no non-frivolous basis to oppose the government's motion. Consequently, the court enforced the waiver and dismissed the appeal.
The appeal is dismissed, and Furley's appointed counsel is permitted to withdraw from the case. The decision reinforces the enforceability of appeal waivers in plea agreements when the defendant has not raised non-frivolous arguments and the waiver was entered into knowingly and voluntarily. No further appellate review is available on the merits of the sentencing or conviction.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download