United States v. Joseph Scott

MEMORANDUM

Joseph Scott appeals the ten-year period of supervised release that was imposed for his failure to register as a sex offender under 18 U.S.C. § 2250 . Specifically, Scott challenges the length of supervised release on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel as well as the district court’s adoption of a miscalculated Sentencing Guidelines range. Scott pleaded guilty and waived many of his appellate rights in his plea agreement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a), and we vacate and remand for re-sentencing.

We review the validity of a waiver of the right to appeal de novo. See, e.g., United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1092, 1094 (9th Cir.2010). Although a defendant may waive the statutory right to appeal, a clear statement from the district court that a defendant has the right to appeal can invalidate a prior written waiver. United States v. Buchanan, 59 F.3d 914, 917-18 (9th Cir.1995). The district court’s statement must be both “unambiguous” and “without qualification.” United States v. Arias-Espinosa, 704 F.3d 616, 619 (9th Cir.2012) (citations and internal quotations omitted). We also consider “the defendant’s reasonable…