an appeal waiver where “the waiver provision was referenced during [the defendant’s] Rule 11 plea colloquy and [the defendant] agreed that she understood the provision and that she entered into it freely and voluntarily.” United States v. Weaver, 275 F.3d 1320, 1333 (11th Cir.2001). Moreover, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure contains a harmless error provision, and errors during the plea colloquy may be harmless in circumstances where “it is manifestly clear from the record that the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the waiver.” Bushert, 997 F.2d at 1351; see also Fed. R.Crim.P. 11(h). But even for a sentence-appeal waiver made knowingly and voluntarily, there may be limits on the type of claims that may be waived. See Johnson, 541 F.3d at 1068 (<HOLDING>). In Bushert, we left open the question of
holding an issue not raised to the family court is not preserved for appellate review holding that an appellate court cannot consider an issue that was not preserved for appellate review recognizing that an effective waiver is not an absolute bar to appellate review holding that an appeal is properly dismissed as moot when an appellate court lacks power to provide an effective remedy for the appellant should it find in his favor holding that there is no due process right to appellate review