United States v. Pacheco, No. 22-1298 (10th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Appellate Case: 22-1298 Document: 010110807922 Date Filed: 02/03/2023 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit February 3, 2023 Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EMIR ITZAYAN QUIROA PACHECO, a/k/a Rayito, No. 22-1298 (D.C. No. 1:21-CR-00231-PAB-5) (D. Colo.) Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before HARTZ, McHUGH, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Emir Itzayan Quiroa Pacheco pleaded guilty to distribution and possession with intent to distribute 50 grams and more of methamphetamine, and he received a 94.5-month prison sentence. He has appealed from that sentence despite the appeal waiver in his plea agreement. The government moves to enforce that waiver under United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315, 1328 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc). Pacheco has filed a response through counsel, and he now chooses not to oppose the motion. When deciding a motion to enforce an appeal waiver, we normally ask: “(1) whether the disputed appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate * This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.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: 22-1298 Document: 010110807922 Date Filed: 02/03/2023 Page: 2 rights; (2) whether 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. But we need not address a Hahn factor the defendant does not dispute. See United States v. Porter, 405 F.3d 1136, 1143 (10th Cir. 2005). Given Pacheco’s non-opposition, he does not address the Hahn factors, so we do not address them either. We therefore grant the government’s motion and dismiss this appeal. 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.
