United States v. Myers

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4059
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CRAIG LAMONT MYERS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR-
03-484-PJM)
Submitted: October 21, 2005 Decided: November 14, 2005
Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard A. Finci, HOULON, BERMAN, BERGMAN, FINCI & LEVENSTEIN,
Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United
States Attorney, Mythili Raman, Assistant United States Attorney,
Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Craig Lamont Myers pled guilty to conspiracy to
distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000),
and the district court sentenced him to 210 months’ imprisonment.
Myers appeals, contending that his sentence, which was imposed
under the then-mandatory federal sentencing guidelines, violates
United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). The Government
asserts that Myers validly waived the right to appeal his sentence
in the plea agreement. We agree with the Government and dismiss
the appeal.
A defendant may waive the right to appeal if that waiver
is knowing and intelligent. United States v. Brown, 232 F.3d 399,
402-03 (4th Cir. 2000). To determine whether a waiver is knowing
and intelligent, we examine “the totality of the circumstances,
including the experience and conduct of the accused, as well as the
accused’s educational background and familiarity with the terms of
the plea agreement.” United States v. General, 278 F.3d 389, 400
(4th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
We review de novo the question of whether a defendant validly
waived his right to appeal. United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162,
168 (4th Cir. 2005).
Our review of the plea agreement and the hearing
conducted pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 leads us to conclude that
Myers knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal.
- 2 -
See General, 278 F.3d at 400-01; see also Blick, 408 F.3d at 169-73(holding that a plea agreement containing a waiver of the right to
appeal, which was accepted by district court prior to the Supreme
Court’s decision in Booker, was not invalidated by change in law
effected by that decision). Moreover, Myers’ claim under Booker
falls within the scope of the waiver. See Blick, 408 F.3d at 170(holding Booker claim is covered by appellate waiver).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 3 -