US v. Kendrick Davi
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to dismiss appeal [999900599-2] Originating case number: 7:15-cr-00075-H-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [16-4095]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.
Malcolm J. Howard,
Senior District Judge. (7:15-cr-00075-H-1)
September 29, 2016
October 3, 2016
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Geoffrey W. Hosford, HOSFORD & HOSFORD, P.C., Wilmington, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Kendrick Davis pled guilty to distribution of Fentanyl, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (2012), and was
sentenced at the bottom of his advisory Sentencing Guidelines
range to 151 months’ imprisonment.
On appeal, counsel for Davis
has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
appeal and acknowledging Davis’ waiver of appellate rights but
supplemental brief despite notice of his right to do so.
Government has moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by the
appellate waiver included in Davis’ plea agreement.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, a defendant may waive his
appellate rights under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (2012).
v. Archie, 771 F.3d 217, 221 (4th Cir. 2014), cert. denied, 135
S. Ct. 1579 (2015).
A waiver will preclude an appeal of “a
specific issue if . . . the waiver is valid and the issue being
appealed is within the scope of the waiver.”
(4th Cir. 2010).
United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 627
Whether a defendant validly waived his right
to appeal is a question of law that we review de novo.
States v. Copeland, 707 F.3d 522, 528 (4th Cir. 2013).
Pg: 3 of 3
Upon review of the plea agreement and the transcript of the
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing, we conclude that Davis knowingly
and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his conviction and
The sentencing claim raised on appeal clearly falls
within the scope of this broad waiver.
We have reviewed the
meritorious issues for appeal outside the scope of the waiver.
Therefore, we grant the motion to dismiss and dismiss Davis’
This court requires that counsel inform Davis, in writing,
of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States
for further review. If Davis requests that such a petition be
frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to
withdraw from representation.
Counsel’s motion must state that
a copy of the motion was served on Davis.
We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
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?