United States v. Vaughn, No. 14-1275 (10th Cir. 2014)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT November 21, 2014 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHARLTON VAUGHN, a/k/a Money, a/k/a Lil’ Money, No. 14-1275 (D.C. No. 1:12-CR-00048-WJM-12) (D. Colo.) Defendant - Appellant. ORDER AND JUDGMENT* Before LUCERO, HARTZ, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges. After accepting a plea agreement that included a waiver of his right to appeal, Charlton Vaughn pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine or base cocaine. Notwithstanding the appeal waiver, he filed a pro se notice of appeal and counsel was appointed to represent Mr. Vaughn on appeal. The government has moved to enforce the waiver. See United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1328 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam). The government has also filed a motion to keep * This panel has determined that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.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. Mr. Vaughn’s plea agreement, attached as an exhibit to the motion to enforce, under seal. Mr. Vaughn’s lawyer has filed a response to the government’s motion to enforce in which he states that “Appellant Vaughn has no objection to the Government’s Motion to Enforce An Appeal Waiver.” Resp. at 2. Moreover, Mr. Vaughn does not object to the motion to seal. The motion to enforce is granted and this matter is dismissed. We also grant the government’s motion to file Mr. Vaughn’s plea agreement under seal. Entered for the Court Per Curiam -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.