was know ing and voluntary he cannot bring the instant appeal, because it would violate his plea agreement. Indeed, a defendant may waive his or her right to appeal through.a plea agreement. As the Second Circuit explained in United States v. Salcido-Contreras: [i]n no circumstance, however, may a defendant, who has secured the benefits of a plea agreement and knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal a certain sentence, then appeal the merits of a sentence conforming to the agreement. Such a remedy would render the plea bargaining process and the resulting agreement meaningless. 990 F.2d 51, 53 (2d Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 509 U.S. 931, 113 S.Ct. 3060, 125 L.Ed.2d 742 (1993); see also Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 260-62, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971) (<HOLDING>). Parrado knowingly and voluntarily waived his
holding that a defendant must have knowledge of the likely consequences of entering the guilty plea in order for a plea to be voluntary and knowing holding that a guilty plea must be both knowing and voluntary and must be a voluntary and intelligent choice among the alternative courses of action available to a defendant holding that a voluntary and knowing plea agreement is equivalent to a contract and the promises stated within must be fulfilled by the parties holding a waiver of a substantial constitutional right must be a voluntary knowing and intelligent act holding that the court must determine whether the employees consent to the settlement agreement was knowing and voluntary