United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Ronald Joseph Trigueiro, Defendant-appellant, 139 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 1998)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Ronald Joseph Trigueiro appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for distribution of amphetamine and use of a semiautomatic weapon during the commission of a crime, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 and 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Because Trigueiro waived the right to appeal his sentence in his plea agreement, we dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Michlin, 34 F.3d 896, 901 (9th Cir. 1994).

Trigueiro's plea agreement contained a waiver of appeal provision. Trigueiro reserved, however, the right to appeal his sentence to the extent that it "is determined to be an offense level higher than 14 prior to the acceptance of responsibility reduction and the criminal history is determined to be higher than a Criminal History Category IV" (emphasis added). Trigueiro argues that because he was sentenced under Criminal History Category V, the waiver provision does not apply. He is wrong.

A plea agreement is contractual in nature and any dispute over its terms is determined by objective standards. See United States v. Goroza, 941 F.2d 905, 909 (9th Cir. 1991). The conjunctive reading of the word "and," especially where, as here, the conjunctive clause is preceded by a disjunctive "or," is the only objective interpretation of the waiver provision. Because Trigueiro's offense level is not higher than 14, the reservation-of-right-to-appeal provision does not apply. Furthermore, while Trigueiro was determined to be in Criminal History Category V, he was still sentenced within the range that was contemplated in the plea agreement, 27-33 months.¹  Accordingly, he waived the right to appeal his sentence.

DISMISSED.