Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-04636/USCOURTS-ca4-19-04636-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Donnell Maurice Pittman
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-4636

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DONNELL MAURICE PITTMAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:18-cr-00348-FL-1)

Submitted: April 14, 2020 Decided: April 16, 2020

Before WILKINSON, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terry F. Rose, TERRY F. ROSE, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Smithfield, North Carolina, for 

Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-4636 Doc: 40 Filed: 04/16/2020 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Donnell Pittman pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to possession 

with intent to distribute cocaine base, cocaine, and marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

§ 841(a)(1) (2018), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, 

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) (2018). The district court sentenced Pittman to 

101 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Pittman argues that the district court improperly

calculated his base offense level by relying on a quantity of cocaine attributed to him

outside the offense date. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by 

Pittman’s waiver of the right to appeal included in his plea agreement. 

An appeal waiver “preclude[s] a defendant from appealing a specific issue if the 

record establishes that the waiver is valid and the issue being appealed is within the scope 

of the waiver.” United States v. Archie, 771 F.3d 217, 221 (4th Cir. 2014). A defendant 

validly waives his appeal rights if he agreed to the waiver “knowingly and intelligently.” 

United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 627 (4th Cir. 2010). “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. Thornsbury, 670

F.3d 532, 537 (4th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). “Generally, 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.” Id.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-4636 Doc: 40 Filed: 04/16/2020 Pg: 2 of 3
3

Our review of the Rule 11 colloquy and the plea agreement confirms that Pittman

knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his sentence and that Pittman’s claim

that the district court miscalculated his Sentencing Guidelines range falls squarely within 

the scope of the waiver. We therefore enforce the appellate waiver and grant the 

Government’s motion to dismiss the appeal. 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

USCA4 Appeal: 19-4636 Doc: 40 Filed: 04/16/2020 Pg: 3 of 3