Case ID: f-appx_475/html/0908-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Angel SALVADOR-RAMIREZ, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 11-5113.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 7, 2012.
    Decided: Aug. 16, 2012.
    William J. Dinkin, Stone, Cardwell & Dinkin, PLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Olivia L. Norman, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Angel Salvador-Ramirez appeals his conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 (2006), and his fifty-seven month sentence. His attorney filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), asserting that there are no meritorious issues for appeal. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by Salvador-Ramirez’s waiver of the right to appeal included in the plea agreement.

Upon review of the plea agreement and the transcript of the Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 hearing, we conclude that Salvador-Ramirez knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence and that the issues he seeks to raise on appeal fall squarely within the compass of his waiver of appellate rights. Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss as to all issues that a defendant may lawfully waive.

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record for non-waivable meritorious issues and have found none. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment as to all issues not encompassed by Salvador-Ramirez’s valid waiver of appellate rights.

This court requires that counsel inform Salvador-Ramirez, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Salvador-Ramirez 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 Salvador-Ramirez.

DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.