United States v. Michael Brown ( 2023 )

USCA4 Appeal: 23-4135 Doc: 24 Filed: 12/18/2023 Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-4135
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL M. BROWN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:18-cr-00063-GMG-RWT-1)
Submitted: December 14, 2023 Decided: December 18, 2023
Before GREGORY and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Kristen M. Leddy, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE
FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. Andrew R.
Cogar, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-4135 Doc: 24 Filed: 12/18/2023 Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Michael M. Brown pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to conspiracy
to commit wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343, 1349, and aggravated identity
theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. The district court sentenced Brown to a total term
of 75 months’ imprisonment. Brown’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal
but questioning whether Brown’s sentence is reasonable. Although notified of his right to
do so, Brown has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. The Government has moved to
dismiss the appeal pursuant to the appellate waiver in Brown’s plea agreement. We affirm
in part and dismiss in part.
“We review an appellate waiver de novo to determine whether the waiver is
enforceable.” United States v. Boutcher, 998 F.3d 603, 608 (4th Cir. 2021). “[W]e will
enforce the waiver if it is valid and if the issue being appealed falls within the scope of the
waiver.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). An appellate waiver is valid if the
defendant enters it “knowingly and intelligently, a determination that we make by
considering the totality of the circumstances.” Id. “Generally though, if a district court
questions a defendant regarding the waiver of appellate rights during the [Fed. R. Crim. P.]
11 colloquy and the record indicates that the defendant understood the full significance of
the waiver, the waiver is valid.” United States v. McCoy, 895 F.3d 358, 362 (4th Cir. 2018)
(internal quotation marks omitted).
Our review of the record confirms that Brown knowingly and intelligently waived
his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, with limited exceptions not applicable here.
2
USCA4 Appeal: 23-4135 Doc: 24 Filed: 12/18/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
We therefore conclude that the waiver is valid and enforceable and that the issue Brown
raises falls squarely within the scope of the waiver.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have
found no potentially meritorious grounds outside the scope of Brown’s appellate waiver.
We therefore grant the Government’s motion and dismiss the appeal as to all issues within
the waiver’s scope. We affirm the remainder of the criminal judgment.
This court requires that counsel inform Brown, in writing, of the right to petition the
Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Brown requests that a petition
be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may
move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state
that a copy thereof was served on Brown. 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