USCA11 Case: 22-13109 Document: 21-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2024 Page: 1 of 4

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-13109 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SAMIH ABDEL RAHMAN,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:12-cr-00515-VMC-AEP-1 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 22-13109 Document: 21-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2024 Page: 2 of 4

2 Opinion of the Court 22-13109

Before WILSON, LUCK, and ED CARNES, Circuit Judges PER CURIAM: Samih Abdel Rahman pleaded guilty to conspiracy to com- mit money laundering. His plea agreement included a forfeiture provision and a sentence appeal waiver. Years later, the govern- ment filed a motion seeking forfeiture of the contents of Rahman’s Federal Bureau of Prisons Trust Fund Account in connection with the forfeiture provision in his plea agreement. Rahman appeals the district court’s grant of that motion. The government moves to dismiss Rahman’s appeal because the sentence appeal waiver bars Rahman from objecting to the forfeiture. I. In 2014 Rahman pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering offenses. As part of his plea deal, Rahman agreed to forfeit “an amount to be determined by the court at sen- tencing representing the amount involved in the offense.” The agreement also included a sentence appeal waiver that stated Rah- man could not appeal his sentence “on any ground” unless he con- tended his sentence exceeded the applicable guidelines range, ex- ceeded the statutory maximum penalty, violated the Eighth Amendment, or unless the government appealed the sentence. During Rahman’s change of plea hearing, the magistrate judge told Rahman that his plea agreement included a provision that “expressly waive[s his] right to appeal [his] sentence unless cer- tain events occur” and then listed those four exceptions. The USCA11 Case: 22-13109 Document: 21-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2024 Page: 3 of 4

22-13109 Opinion of the Court 3

magistrate judge then asked Rahman if he “understand[s] that by this provision of [his] plea agreement, [he has] expressly waived [his] right to appeal [his] sentence” and Rahman confirmed that he understood. The court accepted Rahman’s guilty plea. The Court then entered a forfeiture money judgment find- ing that Rahman obtained at least $3,371,747.00 in proceeds from his participation in a money laundering conspiracy. The judgment allowed the government to seek forfeiture of any of Rahman’s property up to that amount. Years later, the government moved to forfeit the money in Rahman’s Inmate Trust Account as partial satisfaction for his order of forfeiture. The district court granted the government’s motion the same day. Rahman objected to the forfeiture order and filed a notice of appeal. The government moves to dismiss the appeal be- cause the appeal waiver in Rahman’s plea agreement forecloses his ability to appeal the forfeiture. II. We review de novo the validity and scope of a sentence ap- peal waiver. King v. United States, 41 F.4th 1363, 1366 (11th Cir. 2022). Sentence appeal waivers are enforceable if a criminal defend- ant knowingly and voluntarily agreed to the waiver. See United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350 (11th Cir. 1993). To prove a waiver was made knowingly and voluntarily, the government must show that either (1) the district court specifically questioned the defendant about the waiver during the plea colloquy, or (2) the USCA11 Case: 22-13109 Document: 21-1 Date Filed: 02/21/2024 Page: 4 of 4

4 Opinion of the Court 22-13109

record makes clear that the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the waiver. Id. at 1351. Sentence appeal waivers bar appeals of forfeiture orders be- cause “[f]orfeiture is an element of the sentence.” See Libretti v. United States, 516 U.S. 29, 38–39 (1995); 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(1) (“The court, in imposing sentence on a person convicted of [the offense Rahman pleaded guilty to] shall order that the person forfeit to the United States any property, real or personal, involved in such of- fense, or any property traceable to such property.”) (emphasis added); 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c) (“If the defendant is convicted of the offense giving rise to the forfeiture, the court shall order the forfeiture of the property as part of the sentence in the criminal case.”) (emphasis added); cf. United States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 1064, 1067, 1069 (11th Cir. 2008) (finding that a sentence appeal waiver barred an appeal of a restitution order because restitution penalties are “incorpo- rated into the traditional sentencing structure”). Here, Rahman knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his sentence because at his change of plea hearing, the magistrate judge explained the sentence appeal waiver and Rah- man confirmed that he understood the waiver. And none of the exceptions to the appeal waiver within Rahman’s plea agreement apply. Because Rahman cannot appeal his sentence, including any forfeiture orders accompanying that sentence, the government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal waiver in Rah- man’s plea agreement is granted. APPEAL DISMISSED.