US v. William Smith

Filing 920100223

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4225 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILLIAM TURNER SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:07-cr-00011-D-1) Submitted: February 18, 2010 Decided: February 23, 2010 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert J. McAfee, MCAFEE LAW, P.A., New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William Turner Smith pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine and was sentenced to 336 months in prison. Smith's counsel has filed a brief, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), explaining that he found no meritorious grounds for appeal, but suggesting that the district court erred in calculating the drug quantity for sentencing purposes and by denying Smith's motion for a downward variance. Although informed of his right to do so, Smith has The Government moves to not filed a pro se supplemental brief. dismiss Smith's appeal of his sentence on the basis of Smith's waiver of the right to appeal his sentence contained in his plea agreement. A We affirm in part and dismiss in part. defendant may waive the right to appeal if that waiver is knowing and intelligent. United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 169 (4th Cir. 2005). Generally, if the district court fully questions a defendant regarding the waiver of his right to appeal during the Rule 11 colloquy, the waiver is both valid and enforceable. See United States v. Johnson, 410 F.3d 137, 151 (4th Cir. at 2005). the The 11 district hearing, court and informed Smith Smith of that the he waiver Rule stated understood. Moreover, Smith stated that he read and understood the plea agreement, which contained an explicit waiver of the right to appeal from his sentence, except in certain limited 2 circumstances challenge the not relevant here. or On the appeal, validity Smith of the does not waiver. voluntariness Therefore, we find that Smith knowingly and intelligently waived the right to appeal his sentence. Accordingly, we grant the Government's motion to dismiss Smith's appeal of his sentence. We have carefully reviewed the record in accordance with Anders and have found no meritorious issues for appeal not covered by the waiver. Accordingly, we affirm Smith's conviction and dismiss the appeal of his sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Smith in writing of his right to petition review. the Supreme Court of the United States for further If Smith requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may motion this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Smith. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the court are and adequately argument presented not in the the materials decisional would aid process. AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?