United States of America v. Bradley Burns

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted June 10, 2022
Decided June 16, 2022
Before
DIANE S. SYKES, Chief Judge
DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge
MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge
No. 21-2742
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
BRADLEY BURNS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Indiana,
South Bend Division.
No. 3:20CR19-001
Damon R. Leichty,
Judge.
O R D E R
Bradley Burns pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute methamphetamine and
heroin, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A), 846, and of being a felon in possession of a firearm,
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district judge sentenced Burns to 336 months in prison and
five years of supervised release. Although his plea agreement contained a broad appeal
waiver, Burns filed a notice of appeal. His appointed counsel asserts that any argument
on appeal would be frivolous and moves to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with FED. R. A PP. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 3 --

No. 21-2742 Page 2
738, 744 (1967). We agree with counsel and therefore grant his motion to withdraw and
dismiss the appeal.
Counsel’s brief explains the nature of the case and addresses potential issues that
an appeal like this would be expected to involve. Because counsel’s analysis appears
thorough, we limit our review to the subjects that he discusses and that Burns raises in
his response under Circuit Rule 51(b). See United States v. Bey, 748 F.3d 774, 776 (7th Cir.
2014).
Counsel first considers whether Burns could challenge the validity of his guilty
plea and correctly concludes that any such challenge would be frivolous. The transcript
of the plea colloquy reflects that the judge complied with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure. The judge determined that Burns understood the charges against
him, the trial and appeal rights that he was waiving, the maximum penalties for his
offense, and the role of the sentencing guidelines. See FED. R. C RIM. P. 11(b)(1). The judge
further ensured that Burns’s plea was supported by an adequate factual basis and made
voluntarily. See id. R. 11(b)(2)–(3).
In his Rule 51(b) response, Burns argues that the plea agreement “didn’t have
enhancement” in it—an apparent reference to a sentencing enhancement he received for
being the leader of the conspiracy to distribute drugs. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c). To the
extent he argues that the application of this enhancement rendered his plea waiver not
knowing or voluntary, this argument is belied by the terms of the plea agreement,
which Burns swore he read. The agreement acknowledged his understanding that the
court would “determine the applicable sentencing guideline[s] range, and … all
matters, whether factual or legal, relevant to the application of the sentencing
guidelines[,] including … role in the offense adjustments.”
Counsel next considers whether Burns could challenge any aspect of his
sentence, including the judge’s decision not to grant an acceptance-of-responsibility
reduction, but rightly concludes that any challenge would be foreclosed by his appeal
waiver. In his plea agreement, Burns expressly waived his right to appeal the
“conviction and all components of [his] sentence or the manner in which [his]
conviction or [his] sentence was determined or imposed, to any [c]ourt on any ground
other than a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.” An appeal waiver stands or falls
with the underlying guilty plea. United States v. Nulf, 978 F.3d 504, 506 (7th Cir. 2020).
Burns’s plea was valid, so his appeal waiver was also valid. And to the extent Burns
suggests he was misled to sign the plea agreement “based on what [his] lawyer told

-- 2 of 3 --

No. 21-2742 Page 3
[him],” claims of ineffective assistance generally are best reserved for collateral review,
when a fuller record can be developed. See Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500,
504–05 (2003).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED.

-- 3 of 3 --