
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Armando BERMUDEZ-TORRES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-4206.
    United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
    March 3, 2010.
    Diana Hagen, Esq., Office Of The United States Attorney, Salt Lake City, UT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Scott Keith Wilson, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Salt Lake City, UT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before TACHA, MURPHY, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges. ■
   ORDER AND JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the court on the government’s motion to enforce the appeal waiver contained in defendant’s plea agreement. The motion is filed pursuant to United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir.2004) (en banc) (per curiam). In response, defendant concedes that the government’s motion is well taken, and that the appeal should be dismissed, because the appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights, and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. See id. at 1325.

Accordingly, the government’s motion is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. 
      
       This panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R.App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
     