United States v. Judith Monzon, Also Known as Miti

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that enforcement of an appeal waiver is appropriate where “the merits of” a claim “cannot be determined on the basis of the record on appeal”
• stating that a waiver “would be unenforceable if the record of the criminal proceeding revealed that the claim that the waiver was the result of ineffective assistance of counsel was meritorious”
• enforcing appeal waiver where defendant claimed ineffective assistance of counsel but challenged only her sentence and did not seek to withdraw her guilty plea
• explaining that a district court’s internally consistent decision to credit one witness’s testimony over another, when that witness “has told a coherent and facially plausible story that is not contradicted by extrinsic evidence . . . , can virtually never be clear error”
• permitting an appeal from a defendant “‘who has secured the benefits of a plea agreement and knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal’” would “‘render the plea bargaining process and the resulting agreement meaningless.’”
• upholding a district court’s determination that a counsel’s intervention to stop a defendant from lying at a safety valve proffer and thereby damaging her chances of gaining the Government’s recommendation, was not objectively unreasonable conduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).