Background
Kenleone Joe Nyandoro pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm as an unlawful user of a controlled substance, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3). Under his plea agreement, the government would dismiss the charge if he successfully completed the STEPS rehabilitation program, but the case would proceed to sentencing if he failed to complete it. Nyandoro also waived his right to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction or sentence, subject to specified exceptions.
After six months in the program, Nyandoro fled a traffic stop at more than 100 miles per hour and was removed from STEPS. He then sought to withdraw his plea, arguing that § 922(g)(3) violated the Second and Fifth Amendments. The district court denied the motion and sentenced him to 51 months in prison and three years of supervised release. The Fifth Circuit initially affirmed, but the Supreme Court vacated that decision and remanded for reconsideration after recognizing in Hunter v. United States a narrow miscarriage-of-justice exception to sentencing appeal waivers.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit again affirmed. Assuming without deciding that Hunter’s miscarriage-of-justice exception extends from sentencing appeals to appeals challenging convictions, the court held that Nyandoro could not satisfy its demanding standard. An appeal waiver may be overcome only by an obvious, egregious error of a kind that would bring the judicial system into disrepute—not by an uncertain, debatable, or ordinary legal error.
None of Nyandoro’s constitutional theories met that standard. Existing precedent made his Commerce Clause and vagueness challenges reasonably rejectable, while his Second Amendment claim remained debatable because precedent continued to recognize potentially constitutional applications of § 922(g)(3), including restrictions involving present intoxication or individualized dangerousness. The court did not decide whether the statute was constitutional as applied to Nyandoro. It also declined to reopen its earlier ruling that the district court acted within its discretion in denying plea withdrawal, concluding that the Supreme Court’s remand did not reach that issue and that Nyandoro’s belated reliance on United States v. Presley did not alter the Carr-factor analysis.
Key Takeaways
- The Fifth Circuit assumed, but did not decide, that Hunter’s miscarriage-of-justice exception can apply to an appeal waiver covering a conviction challenge.
- A constitutional claim does not overcome an appeal waiver merely because it challenges the statute of conviction; the asserted error must also be obvious and egregious under Hunter.
- Nyandoro’s challenges to § 922(g)(3) were reasonably debatable, so his appeal waiver remained enforceable and the district court’s judgment was affirmed.
Why It Matters
The decision applies Hunter’s narrow exception beyond its original sentencing context only hypothetically, leaving unresolved whether conviction-appeal waivers are subject to the same exception. It nevertheless makes clear that, even if they are, unsettled constitutional questions generally will not satisfy Hunter’s requirement of an error no reasonable judge could make.
For § 922(g)(3) litigation, the court emphasized that recent Second Amendment decisions have not resolved every application of the statute. Defendants who waived appellate review may therefore be unable to obtain merits review while questions concerning present intoxication, dangerousness, and other individualized circumstances remain open.