United States of America v. Charles Dean Studie

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CHARLES DEAN STUDIE,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 21-5087
(D.C. No. 4:20-CR-00095-JFH-1)
(N.D. Okla.)
_________________________________
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
_________________________________
Before MATHESON, KELLY, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________
Charles Dean Studie pleaded guilty to a drug conspiracy and related firearms
charges and received a 228-month prison sentence. He has appealed from that
sentence despite the appeal waiver in his plea agreement. The government now
moves to enforce that waiver under United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1328
(10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam). Through counsel, Studie emphasizes that he
retains the right to bring an ineffective assistance of counsel claim via 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255, but he concedes that his appeal waiver deprives him of any remedy on direct
appeal.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines
of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for
its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
March 22, 2022
Christopher M. Wolpert
Clerk of Court
Appellate Case: 21-5087 Document: 010110660913 Date Filed: 03/22/2022 Page: 1

-- 1 of 2 --

2
When deciding a motion to enforce an appeal waiver, we normally ask:
“(1) whether the disputed appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate
rights; (2) whether the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate
rights; and (3) whether enforcing the waiver would result in a miscarriage of justice.”
Hahn, 359 F.3d at 1325. But we need not address a Hahn factor that the defendant
does not dispute. See United States v. Porter, 405 F.3d 1136, 1143 (10th Cir. 2005).
In light of Studie’s non-opposition, we grant the government’s motion to enforce and
dismiss this appeal.
Entered for the Court
Per Curiam
Appellate Case: 21-5087 Document: 010110660913 Date Filed: 03/22/2022 Page: 2

-- 2 of 2 --