United States v. Prentise Wilkins , 604 F. App'x 322 ( 2015 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4584
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
PRENTISE JAVAUGHN WILKINS,
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. (4:12-cr-00075-D-3)
Submitted: May 26, 2015 Decided: May 29, 2015
Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lewis A. Thompson, III, BANZET, THOMPSON & STYERS, PLLC,
Warrenton, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker,
United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Yvonne V.
Watford-McKinney, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Prentise Javaughn Wilkins appeals his sentence of 276
months (60 months for Count 1 and 216 months consecutively for
Count 2) following his guilty plea pursuant to a plea agreement
to two counts of use of a firearm during and in relation to a
crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) (2012). The
Government argues that Wilkins’ appeal of his sentence is
foreclosed by his waiver of appeal rights in his plea agreement.
For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the appeal.
A criminal defendant may waive the right to appeal if that
waiver is knowing and intelligent. United States v. Poindexter,
492 F.3d 263, 270 (4th Cir. 2007). Generally, if the district
court fully questions a defendant regarding the waiver of his
right to appeal during a plea colloquy performed in accordance
with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, the waiver is both valid and
enforceable. United States v. Johnson, 410 F.3d 137, 151 (4th
Cir. 2005). Whether a defendant validly waived his right to
appeal is a question of law this court reviews de novo. United
States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 168 (4th Cir. 2005).
Where the Government seeks to enforce an appeal waiver and
there is no claim that it breached its obligations under the
plea agreement, we will enforce the waiver if the record
establishes that the defendant knowingly and intelligently
agreed to waive the right to appeal and the issue being appealed
2
is within the scope of the waiver. Id. at 169. Upon review of
the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that Wilkins
knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his
sentence, except for circumstances not extant in this appeal,
and the issue he raises falls within the scope of the waiver.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of Wilkins’ sentence. 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.
DISMISSED
3