United States v. Ana Romero

── United States v. Ana Romero ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: April 27, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-12481 Document: 24-1 Date Filed: 04/27/2026 Page: 1 of 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-12481 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANA ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 3:23-cr-00076-BJD-SJH-1 ____________________ Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Ana Romero appeals her 21-month prison sentence for con- spiring to commit wire fraud and to defraud the IRS. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1349. The government moves to dismiss Romero’s appeal USCA11 Case: 25-12481 Document: 24-1 Date Filed: 04/27/2026 Page: 2 of 4 2 Opinion of the Court 25-12481 based on the sentence appeal waiver in her plea agreement. We conclude that the appeal-waiver provision is enforceable, and that no exception to the waiver applies, so we grant the government’s motion to dismiss. We review de novo the validity and scope of an appeal- waiver provision in a plea agreement. King v. United States, 41 F.4th 1363, 1366 (11th Cir. 2022). Sentence appeal waivers are enforcea- ble if they are made knowingly and voluntarily. Id. at 1367. “The government must show that either (1) the district court specifically questioned the defendant concerning the sentence appeal waiver during the Rule 11 colloquy, or (2) it is manifestly clear from the record that the defendant otherwise understood the full signifi- cance of the waiver.” United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1351 (11th Cir. 1993). We enforce knowing and voluntary appeal waiv- ers “according to their terms.” United States v. Bascomb, 451 F.3d 1292, 1294 (11th Cir. 2006). Here, the government has shown that the appeal waiver is enforceable and bars this appeal. Romero’s plea agreement in- cluded a provision titled and underlined, “Defendant’s Waiver of Right to Appeal the Sentence.” In that provision, Romero “ex- pressly waive[d] the right to appeal [her] sentence on any ground, including the ground that the Court erred in determining the ap- plicable guidelines range,” except for certain excluded grounds. Romero could still appeal on the grounds that the sentence (1) “ex- ceed[ed] the “applicable guideline range as determined by the USCA11 Case: 25-12481 Document: 24-1 Date Filed: 04/27/2026 Page: 3 of 4 25-12481 Opinion of the Court 3 Court”; (2) “exceed[ed] the statutory maximum penalty”; or (3) “vi- olate[d] the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution.” Also, the waiver did not apply if the government appealed. Romero initialed the bottom of each page, and she and her attorney signed a certifi- cation stating that Romero fully understood the terms of the agree- ment. Then, during the plea colloquy, a magistrate judge ques- tioned Romero about the terms of the plea agreement, including the appeal waiver. The judge explained that, under the waiver, Romero “waive[d] [her] right to appeal [her] sentence on any ground, inc