Paragraph 4 of that agreement stipulated that “[t]he defendant will not file an appeal or otherwise challenge the conviction or sentence in the event that the Court imposes a sentence of 24 months or less. This waiver is binding on the defendant even if the Court employs a Guidelines analysis different from” that contemplated by the plea. Rolek was in fact sentenced to 12 months and one day, and the waiver therefore governs. “In no circumstance ... may a defendant, who has secured the benefits of a plea agreement and knowingly and voluntary waived the right to appeal a certain sentence, then appeal the merits of a sentence conforming to the agreement.” United States v. Salcido-Contrer-as, 990 F.2d 51, 53 (2d Cir.1993); see United States v. Rivera, 971 F.2d 876, 896 (2d Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). For the reasons set forth above, the judgment
holding that defendants failure to appeal the voluntariness of a plea constitutes waiver of the issue on subsequent appeal holding that the united states breach of the plea agreement releases the defendant from the appeal waiver holding that a plea agreement with a waiver of direct appeal rights does not include a waiver of collateral remedies because the government could have included a waiver of collateral rights in the plea agreement and chose not to do so holding that a waiver of right to appeal contained in a plea agreement is enforceable holding appeal waiver in conditional guilty plea agreement precluded defendant from asserting new argument on appeal in support of suppression motion