Case Explained: Non-Argument Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EDUARDO PALOMEQUE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-08-13 Docket: 1:24-cr-00181-TFM-MU-1 The eleventh-circuit dismissed the appeal, holding that a valid sentence-appeal waiver bars Eduardo Palomeque’s claim challenging the substantive reasonableness of his 135-month sentence. The court applied the standard that appeal waivers are enforceable if made knowingly and voluntarily, noting that the district court specifically questioned Palomeque about the waiver during the plea colloquy and he entered it voluntarily. The court ruled that a district judge’s erroneous statement at sentencing advising a defendant of their right to appeal does not negate an otherwise valid waiver, even if the government fails to object to that statement. This conclusion is based on the Supreme Court’s decision in *Hunter v. United States*, 146 S. Ct. 1702 (2026), which forecloses the argument that such comments alter a plea agreement. Consequently, Palomeque’s challenge to his sentence is barred, and the appeal is dismissed without reaching the merits of his sentencing claim. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.