US v. James Hagin

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting in part Motion to dismiss appeal [999887134-2]. Originating case number: 5:15-cr-00260-F-1. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999930663]. [16-4136]

Appeal: 16-4136

Doc: 37

Filed: 09/16/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4136

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JAMES OWEN HAGINS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:15-cr-00260-F-1)

Submitted:

September 13, 2016

Decided:

September 16, 2016

Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam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. Kristine L. Fritz, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant
United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-4136

Doc: 37

Filed: 09/16/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
James

Hagins

pled

guilty

to

distribution

pornography, 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2), (b)(1) (2012).

of

child

The district

court sentenced him to 235 months’ imprisonment. Counsel has filed
a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
stating that, in counsel’s view, there are no meritorious issues
for appeal, but questioning the reasonableness of the sentence.
Although advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief,
Hagins has not done so.

The Government has filed a motion to

dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver in Hagins’ plea
agreement.

We affirm in part, and dismiss in part.

“A defendant may waive the right to appeal his conviction and
sentence so long as the waiver is knowing and voluntary.”

United

States v. Davis, 689 F.3d 349, 354 (4th Cir. 2012) (citing United
States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496 (4th Cir. 1992)).

We review

the validity of an appeal waiver de novo, and we “will enforce the
waiver if it is valid and the issue appealed is within the scope
of the waiver.”

Id. at 354-55 (citing United States v. Blick, 408

F.3d 162, 168 (4th Cir. 2005)).
We have reviewed the plea agreement and the Fed. R. Crim. P.
11 hearing, and we conclude that Hagins’ guilty plea and his appeal
waiver were knowing and voluntary.
waiver

is

valid

and

enforceable.

We therefore conclude that the
Hagins’

challenge

to

the

reasonableness of his sentence is foreclosed by the appellate
2

Appeal: 16-4136

waiver.

Doc: 37

Filed: 09/16/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss

the appeal, in part.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record for
any potentially meritorious, unwaived issues, and we have found
none.

We therefore affirm Hagins’ conviction and dismiss the

appeal as to his sentence. This court requires that counsel inform
Hagins, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of
the United States for further review.

If Hagins requests that a

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

Counsel’s motion must state that a

copy thereof was served on Hagins.

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.
AFFIRMED IN PART;
DISMISSED IN PART

3