US v. Artavious Quonta Boddie

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to dismiss appeal [999413606-2] Originating case number: 5:13-cr-00278-BO-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999486986].. [14-4301]

Appeal: 14-4301

Doc: 32

Filed: 12/04/2014

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-4301

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ARTAVIOUS QUONTA BODDIE,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:13-cr-00278-BO-1)

Submitted:

November 18, 2014

Decided:

December 4, 2014

Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Eric J. Brignac,
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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 14-4301

Doc: 32

Filed: 12/04/2014

Pg: 2 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Artavious Quonta Boddie pled guilty in accordance with
a

written

plea

agreement

to

conspiracy

to

commit

Hobbs

Act

robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(b) (2012), and brandishing a firearm
in furtherance of a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)
(2012).

Boddie was sentenced to 151 months in prison for the

conspiracy and eighty-four months, consecutive, for the firearm
offense.

He

now

appeals.

His

attorney

has

filed

a

brief

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising
one issue but stating that there are no meritorious issues for
appeal.

Boddie

was

advised

of

his

right

to

file

supplemental brief but did not file such a brief.
States

moves

to

dismiss

waiver-of-appellate-rights
Boddie opposes the motion.

the

provision

appeal
in

the

a

pro

se

The United

based
plea

on

a

agreement.

We affirm in part and dismiss in

part.
The
convictions.

appeal

waiver

did

not

apply

to

Boddie’s

Having reviewed the entire record, we hold that:

the district court substantially complied with Fed. R. Crim. P.
11;

there

was

a

factual

basis

for

the

plea;

the

plea

was

knowingly and voluntarily entered; and the plea agreement is
binding

and

enforceable.

Accordingly,

convictions.

2

we

affirm

the

Appeal: 14-4301

Doc: 32

In

Filed: 12/04/2014

the

plea

appeal his sentence. *

Pg: 3 of 4

agreement,

Boddie

waived

his

right

to

Upon review of the record, we conclude

that the waiver is valid and enforceable.

We further find that

the issue Boddie seeks to raise on appeal — whether the sentence
is

reasonable

—

falls

within

the

scope

of

the

waiver.

Accordingly, we grant the motion to dismiss the appeal insofar
as the motion relates to sentencing.
Pursuant to Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
for meritorious, nonwaivable issues and have found none.
therefore

affirm

in

part

and

dismiss

in

part.

This

We
court

requires that counsel inform Boddie, in writing, of his right to
petition

the

Supreme

review.

If Boddie requests that such a petition be filed, but

counsel

believes

counsel

may

that
move

Court

the

of

the

United

petition

would

this

State

court

in

withdraw from representation.

be

argument

because

the

further

frivolous,
for

leave

then
to

Counsel’s motion must state that

a copy of the motion was served on Boddie.
oral

for

facts

*

and

legal

We dispense with
contentions

are

Boddie waived his right “to appeal whatever sentence is
imposed on any ground, . . . reserving only the right to appeal
from a sentence in excess of the advisory Guideline range that
is established at sentencing, . . . excepting the Defendant’s
right to appeal based upon grounds of ineffective assistance of
counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. . . .”
Boddie was
sentenced within his Guideline range.

3

Appeal: 14-4301

Doc: 32

adequately

Filed: 12/04/2014

presented

in

the

Pg: 4 of 4

materials

before

the

court

and

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

4