Appellate Case: 22-8032 Document: 010110717752 Date Filed: 07/29/2022 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT July 29, 2022 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. No. 22-8032 (D.C. No. 1:21-CR-00087-NDF-1) DAVID A. JACKSON, a/k/a Gerald David (D. Wyo.) Jackson, a/k/a Gerald D. Roderick-Jackson,

Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________

Before McHUGH, BRISCOE, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________

After David A. Jackson entered into a plea agreement that included a waiver of

his right to appeal, he pleaded guilty to wire fraud, willful failure to pay employment

taxes, and failure to file an individual tax return. He was sentenced to 46 months in

prison. Despite his waiver, he has filed a notice of appeal. The government has

moved to enforce the appeal waiver under United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1328 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam).

Hahn sets forth three factors to evaluate an appeal waiver: “(1) whether the

disputed appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate rights; (2) whether

* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Appellate Case: 22-8032 Document: 010110717752 Date Filed: 07/29/2022 Page: 2

the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights; and (3) whether

enforcing the waiver would result in a miscarriage of justice.” Id. at 1325. In

response to the government’s motion, Mr. Jackson, through counsel, has stated that

he does not object to the dismissal of this appeal pursuant to Hahn.

We need not address the Hahn factors when the defendant does not dispute

them. See United States v. Porter, 405 F.3d 1136, 1143 (10th Cir. 2005). In light of

Mr. Jackson’s concession, the motion to enforce is granted and this appeal is

dismissed.

Entered for the Court Per Curiam

2