US v. Fred Jimmy Condrey, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:09-cr-00322-PMD-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998717455].. [11-4347]

Appeal: 11-4347

Document: 26

Date Filed: 11/07/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-4347

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
FRED JIMMY CONDREY, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.
Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior
District Judge. (2:09-cr-00322-PMD-1)

Submitted:

October 27, 2011

Decided:

November 7, 2011

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

O. Grady Query, Paul N. Uricchio, Charleston, South Carolina,
for Appellant. William N. Nettles, United States Attorney, E.
Jean Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-4347

Document: 26

Date Filed: 11/07/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Fred
court’s

Jimmy

240-month

Condrey,

appeals

following

sentence

Jr.,

his

from

the

guilty

district

plea

to

one

count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine,
in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2006), and one count of
possession

with

marijuana,

in

intent

to

violation

of

distribute
21

U.S.C.

methamphetamine
§ 841(a)(1).

and

Condrey

challenges his sentence as unreasonable, arguing that the 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006) factors warranted a significantly lower
sentence

and

Condrey’s

that

prior

the

district

statements

attributable to him.

in

court

erred

calculating

in

the

considering
drug

weight

The Government filed a responsive brief

arguing that, because Condrey waived his right to appeal his
sentence, this court should dismiss Condrey’s appeal.

In his

reply

valid.

brief,

Condrey

argued

that

his

waiver

was

not

Concluding that Condrey validly waived his right to appeal his
sentence, and that the issues raised are within the scope of the
waiver, we dismiss his appeal.
A

defendant

may

waive

the

right

to

appeal

if

that

United States v. Poindexter,

waiver is knowing and intelligent.
492 F.3d 263, 270 (4th Cir. 2007).

The question of whether a

defendant validly waived his right to appeal is a question of
law that we review de novo.

United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d

162,

We

168

(4th

Cir.

2005).

2

look

to

the

totality

of

the

Appeal: 11-4347

Document: 26

circumstances

to

Date Filed: 11/07/2011

determine

whether

Page: 3 of 3

a

particular

waiver

is

knowing and intelligent.

United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d

621, 627 (4th Cir. 2010).

Our review of the record leads us to

conclude that Condrey did knowingly and voluntarily waive the
right to appeal his conviction and sentence.

Both of the issues

raised in Condrey’s brief fall within the scope of the waiver.
We therefore dismiss Condrey’s appeal.

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.
DISMISSED

3