Full Opinion

Case: 26-60207 Document: 54-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/09/2026 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 26-60207 November 9, 2026 Summary Calendar ____________ Thomas B. Plunkett, III Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Roman Raycharles Walker, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:25-CR-22-1 ______________________________ Before King, Higginson, and Douglas, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Roman Raycharles Walker pleaded guilty to possessing with intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of fentanyl and was sentenced to 188 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release. His plea agreement included an appeal waiver in which * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 26-60207 Document: 54-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/09/2026 No. 26-60207 he waived the right to appeal his sentence on all grounds and reserved only the right to pursue a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Walker argues that the district court erred in applying several enhancements under the Sentencing Guidelines and that his sentence resulted in an unwarranted disparity with other defendants convicted of drug crimes. The Government moves to enforce the appeal waiver and dismiss the appeal and, alternatively, moves for summary affirmance based on its entitlement to enforce the waiver. Walker asserts that he did not knowingly and voluntarily waive his right to appeal because he did not fully understand the terms of the waiver and its exceptions. We review the enforceability of appeal waivers de novo. United States v. Madrid, 978 F.3d 201, 204 (5th Cir. 2020). To determine whether a waiver bars an appeal, we conduct a two-step inquiry, first examining “whether the waiver was knowing and voluntary” and then considering “whether the waiver applies to the circumstances at hand, based on the plain language of the agreement.” United States v. Kelly, 915 F.3d 344, 348 (5th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Both conditions are satisfied here. Accordingly, the Government’s motion to enforce the appeal waiver is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. The Government’s alternative motion for summary affirmance is DENIED. 2