United States v. Eric Rivers ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-4314
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    ERIC MIGUEL RIVERS,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III,
    Chief District Judge. (7:09-cr-00027-D-1)
    Submitted:   January 31, 2014             Decided:   February 27, 2014
    Before KEENAN, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Eric    Miguel    Rivers     seeks     to       appeal   the    district
    court’s order granting in part the Government’s Fed. R. Crim. P.
    35(b) motion for reduction of sentence.                  Rivers argues that the
    district court failed to exercise its discretion in a meaningful
    way when it refused to reduce Rivers’ sentence to the extent
    requested     by    the   United       States,    despite       Rivers’     purported
    exceptional assistance to the Government.                      The Government has
    moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by Rivers’ waiver of the
    right to appeal included in his plea agreement.
    Our review of the record leads us to conclude that
    Rivers knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his
    sentence.     See United States v. Blick, 
    408 F.3d 162
    , 168-69 (4th
    Cir. 2005).        The issue raised by Rivers falls within the scope
    of that waiver.        See United States v. Thornsbury, 
    670 F.3d 532
    ,
    537   (4th    Cir.),      cert.    denied,       133     S.     Ct.   196    (2012).
    Accordingly,       because    Rivers    knowingly      and    voluntarily    entered
    into the waiver and the Government now seeks to enforce it, we
    grant the motion to dismiss.               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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-4314

Judges: Keenan, Diaz, Thacker

Filed Date: 2/27/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024