USA v. Terrill Tremayne Taylor

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 22-12658
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TERRILL TREMAYNE TAYLOR,
Defendant-Appellant.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Alabama
D.C. Docket No. 2:20-cr-00222-ECM-JTA-1
____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 1 of 4

-- 1 of 4 --

2 Opinion of the Court 22-12658
Before N EWSOM , BRANCH, and G RANT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Terrill Taylor pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea
agreement containing a sentence-appeal waiver, to being a felon in
possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). The
district court sentenced Taylor to 57 months’ imprisonment,
followed by 3 years’ supervised release. Taylor appeals, arguing
that the district court erred in imposing a two-level guidelines
enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A).1 The government
moves to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the sentence-appeal
waiver.2 After review, we conclude that the sentence-appeal
waiver is valid and enforceable. Therefore, we grant the
government’s motion to dismiss.
“We review the validity of a sentence appeal waiver de
novo.”
United States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 1064, 1066 (11th Cir.
2008). We enforce appeal waivers that are made knowingly and
voluntarily.
See United States v. Bascomb, 451 F.3d 1292, 1294
(11th Cir. 2006);
United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350–51
(11th Cir. 1993). To demonstrate that a waiver was made
knowingly and voluntarily, the government must show that either
1 Under this guideline, the district court is instructed to add two levels if the
offense involved 3 to 7 firearms.
See U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A).
2 Taylor did not file a response to the government’s motion to dismiss.
USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 2 of 4

-- 2 of 4 --

22-12658 Opinion of the Court 3
(1) the district court specifically questioned the defendant about the
waiver during the plea colloquy; or (2) the record makes clear that
the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the
waiver.
Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351.
Taylor’s plea agreement contained the following appeal
waiver:
Understanding that 18 U.S.C. § 3742 provides for
appeal by a defendant of the sentence under certain
circumstances, the defendant expressly waives any
and all rights conferred by 18 U.S.C. § 3742 to appeal
the conviction or sentence. The defendant further
expressly waives the right to attack the conviction
or sentence in any post-conviction proceeding,
including proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
Exempt from this waiver is the right to appeal or
collaterally attack the conviction or sentence on the
grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel or
prosecutorial misconduct.
Taylor signed the plea agreement.
The record establishes that the magistrate judge3 questioned
Taylor about the sentence-appeal waiver during the change-of-plea
hearing. Specifically, the magistrate judge confirmed that Taylor
read the plea agreement in its entirety, understood it, and signed it.
The magistrate judge explained to Taylor that, by pleading guilty,
3 Taylor consented to the magistrate judge taking his plea.
USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 3 of 4

-- 3 of 4 --

4 Opinion of the Court 22-12658
he was giving up his right to appeal his sentence, and Taylor
confirmed that he understood. Taylor further confirmed that there
were no provisions in the plea agreement that he did not
understand and that he wished to enter the plea agreement. He
also confirmed that no one had made any promises or threats to
him to induce him to enter the plea, and that he was pleading guilty
voluntarily.
Accordingly, the record establishes that Taylor’s sentence-
appeal waiver was knowingly and voluntarily made and is
enforceable.
Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351;
see also United States v.
Weaver, 275 F.3d 1320, 1333 (11th Cir. 2001) (enforcing an appeal
waiver where “the waiver provision was referenced during [the
defendant’s] Rule 11 plea colloquy and [the defendant] agreed that
she understood the provision and that she entered into it freely and
voluntarily”).
Because Taylor’s claim concerning the guidelines
enhancement does not fall within any of the limited exceptions to
the valid sentence-appeal waiver, the waiver forecloses his appeal.
Accordingly, we GRANT the government’s motion to dismiss.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
USCA11 Case: 22-12658 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2023 Page: 4 of 4

-- 4 of 4 --