United States of America v. Jonathan Lee Oliver

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JONATHAN LEE OLIVER,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-30157
D.C. No. 9:13-cr-00034-DWM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 18, 2017**
Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Jonathan Lee Oliver appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 100-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction
for wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343; money laundering, in violation of
FILED
JAN 24 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

18 U.S.C. § 1957; and structuring, in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)(1). We
dismiss.
Oliver contends that the district court procedurally erred in determining that
his prior North Dakota state misdemeanor conviction for fleeing or attempting to
elude a police officer should score a criminal history point under U.S.S.G.
§ 4A1.2(c). The government argues that this appeal should be dismissed based on
the appeal waiver contained in the parties’ plea agreement. Reviewing de novo,
see United States v. Harris, 628 F.3d 1203, 1205 (9th Cir. 2011), we dismiss.
Oliver’s waiver of “any and all right to directly appeal any aspect of the sentence”
unambiguously encompasses the claim he raises on appeal. See id. Contrary to
Oliver’s contention, the provision of the plea agreement that authorizes him, under
certain circumstances, to collaterally attack his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
does not permit this direct appeal.
DISMISSED.
14-30157 2

-- 2 of 2 --