United States of America v. Gerardo Baltierra

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted March 8, 2017
Decided March 8, 2016
Before
WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge
ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge
No. 16‐1450
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff‐Appellee,
v.
GERARDO BALTIERRA,
Defendant‐Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Indiana,
Indianapolis Division.
No. 1:14CR00067‐003
Sarah Evans Barker,
Judge.
O R D E R
Gerardo Baltierra was caught trafficking cocaine in Indianapolis and later
pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess and distribute a controlled substance, see 21
U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced Baltierra to 188 months’
imprisonment. Baltierra’s plea agreement includes a broad appeal waiver, but he still
filed a notice of appeal. His appointed lawyer has moved to withdraw on the ground
that the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel has
submitted a brief that explains the nature of the case and addresses potential issues that
an appeal of this kind might be expected to involve. Baltierra has not accepted our
invitation to comment on counsel’s motion. See C IR . R. 51(b). We limit our review to the
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 16‐1450 Page 2
potential issues that counsel discusses. See United States v. Bey, 748 F.3d 774, 776 (7th Cir.
2014); United States v. Wagner, 103 F.3d 551, 553 (7th Cir. 1996).
Counsel begins by noting that Baltierra has no interest in challenging his guilty
plea, and thus counsel appropriately forgoes any discussion of the adequacy of the plea
colloquy or the voluntariness of the plea. See United States v. Konczak, 683 F.3d 348, 349
(7th Cir. 2012); United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 670–71 (7th Cir. 2002). Counsel
considers challenging the length of Baltierra’s prison sentence but properly concludes
that to do so would be frivolous because the guilty plea is valid and thus, so is the
appeal waiver, see United States v. Zitt, 714 F.3d 511, 515 (7th Cir. 2013); United States v.
Sakellarion, 649 F.3d 634, 639 (7th Cir. 2011), and counsel has not identified any
exception that would apply here, see United States v. Adkins, 743 F.3d 176, 192–93
(7th Cir. 2014).
Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.

-- 2 of 2 --