Background
Erica Mack pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute a mixture and substance containing detectable amounts of methamphetamine and fentanyl. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas imposed a below-guidelines sentence of 108 months in prison.
Mack appealed, challenging the denial of a mitigating-role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. She also argued that her asserted status as a minor or minimal participant entitled her to additional offense-level reductions under U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1(b)(17) and 2D1.1(a)(5). The government responded that the appeal waiver in Mack’s plea agreement barred the appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal. Reviewing the waiver issue de novo, the court applied its two-step inquiry: whether Mack knowingly and voluntarily entered the waiver, and whether the waiver’s plain language covered the appeal. The record established that both requirements were satisfied.
Because the valid waiver applied to Mack’s sentencing challenges, the court did not reach the merits of her requested guideline reductions. The court also noted that Mack neither challenged nor addressed the waiver’s validity in her opening brief and filed no reply responding to the government’s waiver argument.
Key Takeaways
- A knowing and voluntary appeal waiver is enforceable when its plain language covers the issues raised on appeal.
- The court dismissed Mack’s sentencing appeal without deciding whether she qualified for mitigating-role or related drug-guideline reductions.
- The panel warned Mack’s counsel that pursuing an appeal contrary to a valid waiver without responding to the government’s waiver argument wastes judicial resources and could result in sanctions.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that defendants who agree to valid appeal waivers generally cannot obtain appellate review of sentencing issues within the waiver’s scope. It also signals that appellate counsel must directly confront the government’s reliance on a waiver rather than briefing only the underlying sentencing claims.