United States v. Bailey
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Dismissed
The Tenth Circuit reviewed Demetrius Bailey’s appeal, filed after he received a 264-month sentence pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, under the Anders framework. Concluding that no non-frivolous grounds for appeal existed, the panel granted counsel’s motion to withdraw and dismissed the appeal.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether a defendant who received a specific-sentence plea under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) may appeal the sentence as procedurally or substantively unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a)(1) on the ground that it was “imposed in violation of law.”
Circuit Positions
Reasonableness review NOT available for Rule 11(c)(1)(C) sentences; the defendant waived any challenge by agreeing to the specific sentence.
Reasonableness review IS available; § 3742(a)(1) permits challenges that the sentence is procedurally or substantively unreasonable even when imposed pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea.
Question expressly noted but not resolved in this circuit.
Conflict Summary
Several circuits hold that when a district court imposes the exact sentence specified in a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) agreement, the defendant cannot later argue the sentence is procedurally or substantively unreasonable because the sentence was ‘bargained for.’ Other circuits allow such appeals, reasoning that the statutory phrase ‘imposed in violation of law’ is broad enough to encompass conventional reasonableness review even for a bargained-for sentence. The Tenth Circuit, in this opinion, expressly notes the split but leaves the question open.