The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld an appeal waiver in the case of Kory Bryan Tuell, affirming his 25-year sentence for voluntary manslaughter. This decision affects Tuell, who had hoped to challenge his sentence, and sets a precedent regarding the enforcement of appeal waivers in plea agreements.

The court ruled on November 4, 2026, in a case that originated in the Northern District of Oklahoma. Tuell had previously entered a guilty plea under a plea agreement that included a waiver of his right to appeal a sentence of 25 years or less. The court's decision emphasizes the importance of adhering to plea agreements, particularly the stipulations regarding appeal rights.

Background

Kory Bryan Tuell was charged with serious offenses, including First Degree Murder in Indian Country and Voluntary Manslaughter, among others. The government later charged him with Voluntary Manslaughter and firearm-related offenses. Tuell pleaded guilty to these charges as part of a plea agreement that stipulated the government would recommend a 25-year sentence and move to dismiss the original indictment.

The plea agreement included a broad waiver of Tuell's rights to appeal his conviction and sentence, although it preserved his right to appeal if the sentence exceeded 25 years. At sentencing, the district court imposed the exact sentence the government recommended: 25 years. Tuell did not object to the government’s arguments during sentencing, nor did he argue that the government had breached the plea agreement.

The Ruling

The Tenth Circuit Court ruled to enforce the appeal waiver in Tuell's plea agreement. The court found that the government had not breached the agreement by arguing for a 25-year sentence, despite Tuell's claims that the government mischaracterized the nature of the killing. The court stated, "Considering the express language in the agreement, Tuell has not shown the government breached the plea agreement with its conduct at sentencing."

The judges on the panel included Circuit Judges Hartz, Moritz, and Rossman. The court concluded that Tuell's appeal fell within the scope of the waiver he had signed, and that he had knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights. The court also noted that enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice.

Impact

This ruling reinforces the enforceability of appeal waivers in plea agreements, particularly in cases involving serious criminal charges. It highlights that defendants must understand the implications of waiving their appeal rights when entering a plea agreement. The decision underscores the necessity for defendants to object to any perceived breaches of plea agreements during sentencing to preserve their rights for appeal.

The ruling may serve as a precedent for future cases involving appeal waivers, emphasizing the importance of clear communication and understanding between defendants and their legal counsel regarding the terms of plea agreements.

What's Next

As of now, it appears that Tuell has exhausted his options for appeal regarding this matter. There are no indications in the court filing that a related case is pending or that Tuell plans to pursue further legal action.