## Facts

- Brian Melancon was charged in federal court with conspiracy to distribute methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA).
- Melancon entered a plea agreement and pleaded guilty.
- During the Rule 11 plea colloquy, the district court advised Melancon that by pleading guilty he was waiving the right to appeal his sentence, and Melancon stated he understood.
- The plea agreement did not promise a particular sentence; Melancon was advised he would be sentenced under the Sentencing Guidelines, that the court could depart, and that the statutory maximum penalty was 20 years’ imprisonment.
- The district court sentenced Melancon to 108 months’ imprisonment.
- Melancon appealed his sentence; the government argued the appeal was barred by the appeal waiver.

## Issues

1. Whether a federal criminal defendant may validly waive the statutory right to appeal a sentence as part of a guilty plea.
2. Whether Melancon’s appeal waiver was knowing and voluntary such that it barred appellate review of his sentencing challenges.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal.
- The court held that the right to appeal a sentence is statutory and may be waived in a plea agreement if the waiver is knowing and voluntary.
- The court concluded the record of the Rule 11 colloquy showed Melancon knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his sentence.
- Because the waiver was enforceable, the court did not reach the merits of Melancon’s objections to the sentence.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant may waive statutory appellate rights, including the right to appeal a sentence, as part of a plea agreement.
- An appeal waiver is enforceable when the defendant’s waiver is knowing and voluntary, as shown by the plea proceedings and the defendant’s on-the-record acknowledgments.
- A waiver is not invalid merely because the plea does not specify the exact sentence; a defendant may waive appeal while accepting sentencing uncertainty within the Guidelines framework and statutory maximum.
- A valid appeal waiver forecloses ordinary appellate review of sentencing issues; challenges directed at the validity of the plea process itself are conceptually distinct from a barred sentencing appeal.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit enforced Melancon’s plea-based waiver of the right to appeal his sentence and dismissed his appeal because the Rule 11 record showed an informed and voluntary relinquishment of that statutory right.


United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566 (5th Cir. 1992)