Appellate Case: 24-1196    Document: 45-1    Date Filed: 12/16/2024     Page: 1
                                                                                  FILED
                                                                      United States Court of Appeals
                        UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        Tenth Circuit

                              FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT                         December 16, 2024
                          _________________________________
                                                                         Christopher M. Wolpert
                                                                             Clerk of Court
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

         Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.                                                          No. 24-1196
                                                  (D.C. No. 1:19-CR-00356-RM-15)
 RAYO COSMOPOLITINA TEETER,                                   (D. Colo.)

         Defendant - Appellant.
                        _________________________________

                              ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
                          _________________________________

Before TYMKOVICH, BACHARACH, and EID, Circuit Judges.
                 _________________________________

        Rayo Teeter’s plea agreement included a broad waiver of her appellate rights.

Yet she appeals her sentence. The government moves to enforce her appeal waiver.

Her attorney responded, concluding the waiver should be enforced and moving to

withdraw. See Anders v. California, 

 (1967). We invited

Ms. Teeter to respond herself, but she has not done so. Our duty in these

circumstances is to examine the record and decide whether opposing the

government’s motion would be frivolous. We think it would.




        *
         This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines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: 24-1196      Document: 45-1      Date Filed: 12/16/2024    Page: 2



      We will enforce an appeal waiver if (1) the appeal falls within the waiver’s

scope, (2) the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal, and

(3) enforcing the waiver will not result in a miscarriage of justice. See United States

v. Hahn, 

 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam).

      Scope of the waiver. Ms. Teeter waived “the right to appeal any matter

in connection with this prosecution, conviction, or sentence.” Mot. to Enforce,

Attach. 1 at 2–3. The waiver has three exceptions, but none applies. And so the

waiver covers this appeal.

      Knowing and voluntary waiver. The plea agreement and the plea colloquy

show that Ms. Teeter knowingly and voluntarily waived her right to appeal.

      Miscarriage of justice. Enforcing an appeal waiver will result in a miscarriage

of justice if (1) the district court relied on an impermissible sentencing factor;

(2) ineffective assistance of counsel in negotiating the waiver makes it invalid;

(3) the sentence exceeds the statutory maximum; or (4) the waiver is otherwise

unlawful in a way that seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of

the proceedings. See Hahn, 

. We see nothing suggesting that

enforcing the waiver here will result in a miscarriage of justice.

                                     *      *      *

      We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. We grant the government’s motion to

enforce the appeal waiver. We dismiss this appeal.

                                             Entered for the Court

                                             Per Curiam

                                            2