US v. Charles Edgar Ware
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:14-cr-00015-JPB-JSK-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999706971].. [14-4727]
Appeal: 14-4727
Doc: 59
Filed: 11/25/2015
Pg: 1 of 4
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4727
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CHARLES EDGAR WARE, a/k/a Edgar Charles Ware,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins.
John Preston Bailey,
District Judge. (2:14-cr-00015-JPB-JSK-1)
Argued:
October 28, 2015
Decided:
November 25, 2015
Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ARGUED: Katy J. Cimino, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellant.
Stephen L. Vogrin,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
ON BRIEF:
Kristen M. Leddy, Research & Writing
Specialist, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Clarksburg,
West Virginia, for Appellant. William J. Ihlenfeld, II, United
States Attorney, Tara N. Tighe, Assistant United States
Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-4727
Doc: 59
Filed: 11/25/2015
Pg: 2 of 4
PER CURIAM:
Charles
possession
Edgar
of
Ware
child
pleaded
pornography
§ 2252A(a)(5)(B) & (b)(2).
guilty
in
to
one
violation
of
count
18
of
U.S.C.
At sentencing, the district court
determined that Ware had a total offense level of 29 and a
criminal history category of II, which would have yielded an
advisory guideline prison term range of 97 to 121 months.
After
consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, the district
court imposed an upward variance, resulting in a sentence of 180
months,
or
almost
50
guidelines range.
percent
above
the
top
of
the
advisory
Despite the existence of an appellate waiver
in the plea agreement, Ware attempts to appeal his sentence.
We
enforce the appellate waiver and dismiss this appeal.
Ware’s guilty plea was made pursuant to a plea agreement,
memorialized
by
the
parties
in
a
six-page
document.
In
paragraph eleven of the agreement, Ware consented to waive his
right to appeal his sentence in a post-conviction proceeding,
unless
the
district
court
level was 31 or greater.
it
unequivocally
clear
determined
that
his
total
offense
At sentencing, the district court made
that
Ware’s
total
offense
level—after
adjustments for acceptance of responsibility—was 29.
We review the application of an appeal waiver within a plea
agreement de novo.
(4th Cir. 2005).
United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 168
It is uncontested that a defendant may waive
2
Appeal: 14-4727
the
Doc: 59
right
Filed: 11/25/2015
to
an
appeal
as
Pg: 3 of 4
part
of
a
valid
plea
agreement.
United States v. Wiggins, 905 F.2d 51, 53 (4th Cir. 1990).
agreements
are
governed
by
contract
law
and
we
Plea
use
the
agreement’s plain language as taken in its ordinary sense to
determine the bargain between the parties.
United States v.
Jordan, 509 F.3d 191, 195 (4th Cir. 2007).
We will generally
enforce such a waiver if the waiver is valid and the issue being
appealed is covered by the waiver.
Blick, 408 F.3d at 168.
We
may “decline[] to enforce a valid appeal waiver only where the
sentencing court [has] violated a fundamental constitutional or
statutory
right
that
was
firmly
established
at
the
time
of
sentencing,” United States v. Archie, 771 F.3d 217, 223 (4th
Cir.
2014),
or
if
enforcing
the
waiver
“would
result
in
a
miscarriage of justice,” United States v. Johnson, 410 F.3d 137,
151 (4th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation omitted).
Ware
does
not
challenge
the
validity
of
the
waiver.
Rather, Ware contends that the district court’s sentence exceeds
the scope of the appeal waiver.
We disagree.
The district court found that the total offense level was
29 and noted that, since the statutory mandatory minimum was 120
months, “the guidelines call for incarceration of 120 to 121
months.”
JA 52.
The district court then expressly stated that
it was imposing a sentence “above the guideline range to protect
the public, especially children, from further crime.”
3
JA 68
Appeal: 14-4727
Doc: 59
Filed: 11/25/2015
(emphasis added).
Pg: 4 of 4
The district court went to great lengths to
explain that Ware’s particular criminal history, victim impact
statements, and other material it reviewed from the presentence
report justified an upward variance from the guidelines range.
In sum, because Ware knowingly and voluntarily entered into
the
plea
agreement
containing
a
waiver
of
appellate
rights,
because this appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, and
because
enforcement
of
the
waiver
would
not
result
in
a
miscarriage of justice, we conclude that his appellate waiver is
enforceable.
We therefore enforce the waiver and dismiss the
appeal.
DISMISSED
4
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?