US v. Angel Jorge Ramirez
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting in part and denying in part Motion to dismiss appeal [998551294-2] Originating case number: 1:10-cr-00157-RDB-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998710115].. [11-4101]
Appeal: 11-4101
Document: 35
Date Filed: 10/27/2011
Page: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-4101
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ANGEL JORGE RAMIREZ, a/k/a Negro,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
Richard D. Bennett, District Judge.
(1:10-cr-00157-RDB-1)
Submitted:
October 20, 2011
Decided:
October 27, 2011
Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
James Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Meghan S. Skelton, Staff
Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Peter Marshall
Nothstein, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 11-4101
Document: 35
Date Filed: 10/27/2011
Page: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Angel Jorge Ramirez pled
guilty to conspiracy to interfere with commerce through robbery.
He was sentenced to thirty months in prison.
On appeal, counsel
has filed an Anders * brief, stating that there are no meritorious
grounds for appeal but questioning whether the district court
gave sufficient reasoning for the chosen sentence.
not filed a pro se brief.
the
appeal,
agreement.
based
on
Ramirez has
The Government has moved to dismiss
a
waiver
provision
in
Ramirez’s
plea
appeal
that
We affirm in part and dismiss in part.
A
defendant
may
waive
the
right
to
if
United States v. Blick, 408
waiver is knowing and intelligent.
F.3d 162, 169 (4th Cir. 2005).
Generally, if the district court
fully
at
questions
proceeding
a
regarding
defendant
the
waiver
his
of
his
waiver is both valid and enforceable.
410 F.3d 137, 151 (4th Cir. 2005).
Fed.
R.
right
Crim.
to
P.
appeal,
11
the
United States v. Johnson,
Whether a defendant validly
waived his right to appeal is a question of law that we review
de novo.
Blick, 408 F.3d at 168.
After reviewing the record, we conclude that Ramirez
knowingly
and
voluntarily
waived
his
right
to
appeal
his
sentence, retaining only his right to appeal a sentence greater
*
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
2
Appeal: 11-4101
Document: 35
Date Filed: 10/27/2011
than thirty-six months.
Page: 3 of 3
Accordingly, as Ramirez was sentenced
to thirty months, he retained no appellate rights with respect
to his sentence.
We therefore grant, in part, the Government’s
motion to dismiss and dismiss this portion of the appeal.
The waiver provision does not prevent our review of
any errors in Ramirez’s conviction, however.
After reviewing
the entire record in accordance with Anders, we conclude that
there are no unwaived, meritorious issues for appeal.
Thus, we
deny, in part, the Government’s motion to dismiss and affirm
Ramirez’s conviction.
Thus, we affirm Ramirez’s conviction and
dismiss the appeal of his sentence.
This court requires that
counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition
the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If
the
client
requests
that
a
petition
be
filed,
but
counsel
believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel
may
move
in
representation.
this
court
for
leave
to
withdraw
from
Counsel’s motion must state that a copy of the
motion was served on his client.
We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional 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?