and the manner in which it was determined” unless the court “depart[ed] upwards” from the sentencing guidelines. Despite this provision, she complains that her sentence is too long. A defendant may waive any right, including a constitutional right, in a plea agreement so long as the waiver is knowing and voluntary. United States v. Calderon, 388 F.3d 197, 199 (6th Cir.2004). As mentioned previously, Coker does not claim that her plea agreement was involuntary or made in ignorance, nor could she given her discussion of the plea agreement with Judge Echols. We have repeatedly enforced plea agreements waiving specific appellate rights under similar circumstances, United States v. Sharp, 442 F.3d 946, 949, 952 (6th Cir.2006); United States v. McGilvery, 403 F.3d 361, 363 (6th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>), and we enforce the agreement before us today.
holding that a failure to file an appeal is within the scope of the waiver because the failure does not undermine the validity of the plea or waiver holding a waiver valid and strongly encouraging the government to file a motion to dismiss the appeal in similar future cases to avoid wasting time and resources holding that an appeal waiver is valid if it is the result of a knowing and intelligent decision to forgo the right to appeal holding that the trial court did not violate due process in considering the defendants motion to dismiss because the defendant had corrected its error in not serving its motion to dismiss on the plaintiff and because the plaintiff had received adequate time to consider and respond to the arguments made in the motion holding that the failure to file a proper motion to dismiss raising a constitutional challenge to a criminal statute waives the issue on appeal