US v. James Ebron

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting in part motion to dismiss appeal [999013564-2] Originating case number: 4:11-cr-00045-D-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999067862].. [12-4594]

Appeal: 12-4594

Doc: 32

Filed: 03/20/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-4594

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JAMES CALVIN EBRON, a/k/a Calvin James Ebron,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Dever III,
Chief District Judge. (4:11-cr-00045-D-1)

Submitted:

March 14, 2013

Decided:

March 20, 2013

Before KING, GREGORY, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant.
Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States
Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-4594

Doc: 32

Filed: 03/20/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
James

Calvin

Ebron

appeals

the

288-month

sentence

imposed after he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and
possess

with

intent

to

distribute

more

than

one

kilogram

of

heroin and a quantity of marijuana and ecstasy, in violation of
21 U.S.C. § 846 (2006).

Ebron’s attorney filed a brief pursuant

to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that
there

are

no

meritorious

issues

for

appeal

but

questioning

whether the government’s notice of enhancement under 21 U.S.C.
§ 851 (2006) was defective.

Ebron filed a supplemental pro se

brief asserting that his drug addiction is a disability that is
legally distinguishable from the crime of drug dealing.

The

Government has moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by Ebron’s
waiver of his appellate rights in the plea agreement.

We affirm

in part and dismiss in part.
We review the validity of an appellate waiver de novo
and will uphold the waiver if it “is valid and . . . the issue
being

appealed

is

within

the

scope

of

the

waiver.”

States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 168 (4th Cir. 2005).

United
After

reviewing the plea agreement and the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 plea
proceeding,

we

conclude

that

Ebron

knowingly

and

voluntarily

waived his right to appeal his sentence and that the sentencing
issue

raised

on

appeal

is

within

2

the

scope

of

that

waiver.

Appeal: 12-4594

Doc: 32

Filed: 03/20/2013

Pg: 3 of 3

Accordingly, we grant the government’s motion to dismiss in part
and dismiss the appeal as to Ebron’s sentence.
Because Ebron did not waive the right to appeal his
conviction, we deny the government’s motion to dismiss in part.
We

have

reviewed

the

record

in

accordance

with

Anders

and

conclude that Ebron knowingly and voluntarily entered a valid
guilty plea.

See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116,

119-20 (4th Cir. 1991).

Further, we have found no unwaived

meritorious issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm Ebron’s

conviction.
This
writing,

of

court

the

requires

right

to

that

petition

United States for further review.

counsel
the

inform

Supreme

Ebron,

Court

of

in
the

If Ebron requests that a

petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition
would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for
leave to withdraw from representation.

Counsel’s motion must

state that a copy thereof was served on Ebron.

We dispense with

oral

legal

contentions

are

before

this

and

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

court

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED IN PART;
AFFIRMED IN PART

3